Advertisement

Investigation of Leisure Perceptions of Individuals in Outdoor Sports

  • Burak GürerEmail author
  • Ebru Caymaz
Original Paper
  • 305 Downloads

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the perceptions of the individuals about outdoor sports who actively participate in outdoor sports in their leisure time. This study is crucial due to the lack of research on this particular subject. Target population of the study involves those who participated in outdoor sports between the years of 2015–2016. The sample of the study includes 319 (180 Male, 139 Female) people who are interested in various outdoor sports in Gaziantep, Istanbul, Osmaniye, Balıkesir and Antalya in Turkey. Grasping the Meaning of Leisure Scale which was adapted to Turkish by Gürbuz, Ozdemir and Karakucuk (Gürbüz et al. 2007) and reformed by Esteve et al. (Leisure Studies, 18(2), 79–91, Esteve et al. 1999) is used in this study. Statistical differences between gender, age, educational status and experience in outdoor sports variables (p < 0.05) were found. There was no statistical difference between the occupational group and types of outdoor sports. It is thought that outdoor sports are a leisure activity which is preferred when there is opportunity. It could be said that individuals generally like and enjoy their time in nature. It is suggested that leisure time should be spent in nature in order to get away from the stress of city life.

Keywords

Outdoor sports Leisure Sportsman Recreation 

1 Introduction

At the present time, it has become a lifestyle to plan leisure activities. Accordingly, it becomes compulsory to product a project in order to increase leisure activities and expand planning of leisure (Kelly 1990). The main reasons of increasing need of outdoor recreational activities and outdoor sports are industrialization and urbanization (Aslan 1992). Some problems especially among youngsters which are being faced with by the country, families and educators, have become threats that affects the life quality in a negative way (Çelebi et al. 2012). According to American Institute of Stress, 43% of American adults have negative medical condition depending on acute or chronic stress (Godbey 2009). In this sense, recreational programmes should be thought as an important assistant or an approach to prevent those problems and increase life quality within the leisure perception (Çelebi et al. 2012). Activities done actively and passively should involve the efforts of the individuals in their occupation field, help the individuals take part in the society and embelish life (Kelly 1990; Yerlisu Lapa and Ardahan 2009).

Sports done in nature are called outdoor sports (Ardahan and Yerlisu Lapa 2011). The increasing interest in outdoor sports, seeking for new excitements, the reasons of choosing the outdoor sports of individuals and benefits of the individuals by doing outdoor sports have aroused interests of scientists because outdoor sports have revealed more different results rather compared to some other fields (Gürer 2012). For instance, mountain climbing consists of not only climbing but also struggle, risk and difficulty (Graydon and Hanson 2005). Many researchers have tried to examine the participation in outdoor sports. They examined the benefits of outdoor sports on individuals doing them and it was revealed that outdoor sports have effects on taking responsibility, leadership, decision making, trust, socializing, bein happy and taking risks (McKenzie 2000; Yerlisu Lapa et al. 2010). In leisure activities, the participation in outdoor sports has been increasing. Correspondingly, experiencing adventures in nature and organizational education have developed fast and advanced (Wagner et al. 1991; McEvoy 1997). Leisure is a subjective pattern. That’s’ why, definitions on leisure might be different from one another depending on its aim (Hall and Page 1999). Leisure is defined as the time staying out of work, sleep and compulsions, and activities done during this period of time are defined as leisure activities (Roberts 2006). According to Esteve et al. (1999) leisure is a period of time when an individual doesn’t work, staying out of life habits and spent according to the wishes of the individual, also the time desired. In a different definition, it is accepted as a period of time without depending on the forcing out of our wishes, controlled by the individual, arousing fun, having good time and being happy, not being paid, lived satisfactory experiences (Mieczkowski 1990). Leisure is the time out of working time, which shows the relation between leisure and working time of individuals. It means that the more people work, the less leisure they have, and the less they work, the more leisure they have. Researches indicate that lifetime has got long in industrialized countries together with better living conditions and developments on health. People have worked less and live more compare with old times. Such developments have increased the leisure of people, so people whose leisure increasing have found an opportunity to participate in more leisure activities (Demir and Çevirgen 2006).

In the light of information given above, our research is crucial to reveal the reasons why individuals tend to outdoor sports in their leisure. Regarding to the geography of our country, outdoor sports have a very important place on planning leisure. The aim of this research is to examine, interpret and offer suggestions individuals’ leisure perception according to some demographic variables of the individuals participating in outdoor sports as leisure activities.

2 Method

2.1 Population and Sample

In this research, questionnaire technique is used as a quantitative research method. Within this framework, the population of this research consists of individuals doing outdoor sports in Turkey. And its sample consists of 319 (180 male, 139 female) people who are interested in mountain climbing (% 20.4), hiking (% 38.2), paragliding (% 18.2), mountain biking (% 5) and rock climbing (% 18.2). The survey data were collected from Gaziantep, Istanbul, Osmaniye, Balıkesir and Antalya. And its sample consists of 140 people in total; 80.7% (113 male) and 19.3% (27 female) aged between 18 and 46.

2.2 Data Collection Tool

“Grasping the Meaning of Leisure Scale”, which is developed by used Esteve et al. (1999) and adapted to Turkish by Gürbüz et al. (2007), is used as the data collection tool. The scale consists of totally 35 entries and 8 sub-dimensions. (Esteve et al. 1999; Gürbüz et al. 2007). They are the sub-dimensions of freedom (5–13–21 − 29-34), working relationship (8–16–24-30-35), social interaction (2–10–18-26-32), use of leisure (4–12–20-28-33), active-passive participation (1–9 − 17- 25-31), target tendency (7–15 − 23), perceived competence (3–11–19-27) and internal motivation (6–14-22. Internal consistency index of Cronbach Alpha scale in the research was detected. According to the results of the analysis, consistency for 8 dimensions (α) internal consistency indexes were calculated (0.76) for freedom, (0.77)for working relationship, (0.80) for social interaction, (0.75) for use of leisure, (0.73) for active-passive participation, (0.77) for target tendency, (0.77) for perceived competence and (0.54) for internal motivation.

2.3 Data Collection

In this research, the questions of the questionnaire form were adapted to outdoor sporters. And the data was collected in Gaziantep, Istanbul, Izmir, Trabzon, Osmaniye, Balıkesir and Antalya in 2015–2016. The questionnaire was carried out in a number of cities.

2.4 Data Analysis

The collected data within the research was interpreted by means of the analysis of statistical packed software (SPSS 20.0). Normality distribution and homogeneity of the research data was controlled. According to the results of the analysis, it was seen that they had no normal distribution or homogeneity. Descriptive statistics were produced in order to have an idea about the data by using arithmethic average, standard deviation, frequency and percentage distribution. In the examination of relation of the data with demographic variables, in case of two groups, Mann-Whitney U test was carried out, and in case of more than two groups, Kruskal-Wallis H test was carried out (Tables 1, 2, 3, 4, 5 and 6).
Table 1

The distribution of the points of leisure perception according to Gender variable.

 

Gender

N

Mean Rank

Rank Sum

U

Z

p

Perceived Freedom

Male

Female

180

139

149,14

174,06

26845

24195

10555

-2401

,016*

Working Relationship

Male

Female

180

139

155,06

166,40

27911

23129

11621

−1093

,274

Social Interaction

Male

Female

180

139

146,48

177,51

26365,50

24674,50

10075,5

-2999

,003*

Use of Leisure

Male

Female

180

139

153,02

169,04

27543

23497

11253

−1547

,122

Active Passive Participation

Male

Female

180

139

155,42

165,92

27976,50

23063,50

11686,5

-1015

,310

Target Tendency

Male

Female

180

139

156,66

164,33

28198,50

22841,50

11908,5

−0,745

,456

Perceived Competence

Male

Female

180

139

158,32

162,17

28498

22542

12208

−0,372

,710

Internal Motivation

Male

Female

180

139

143,15

181,82

25767,50

25272,50

9477,5

−3739

,000*

*p < 0,05

Table 2

The distribution of the points of leisure perception according to age variable

 

Age

N

Mean Rank

SD

X2

p

Difference

(Group)

Perceived freedom

17–20 Age

21–24 Age

25–28 Age

29–33 Age

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

156,74

140,84

190,42

199,32

146,44

4

17,032

0,002*

2–3

2–4

Working Relationship

17–20 Age

21–24 Age

25–28 Age

29–33 Age

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

171,35

132,23

170,18

181,32

174,72

4

14,054

0,007*

1–2

Social Interaction

17–20 Age

21–24 Age

25–28 Age

29–33 Age

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

161,87

140,06

169,15

201,84

163,71

4

11,346

0,023*

2–4

Use of Leisure

17–20 Age

21–24 Age

25–28 Age

29–33 Age

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

157,61

137,64

168,05

207,54

174,53

4

15,255

0,004*

2–4

Active - Passive Participation

17–20 Age

21–24 Age

25–28 Age

29–33 Age

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

150,20

141,22

176,67

188,04

180,99

4

12,253

0,016*

2–5

2–4

Target Tendency

17–20 Yaş

21–24 yaş

25–28 yaş

29–33 yaş

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

152,38

134,37

172,95

211,61

182,51

4

21,641

0,000*

2–5

2–4

1–4

Perceived Competence

17–20 Yaş

21–24 yaş

25–28 yaş

29–33 yaş

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

169,83

132,43

175,41

196,05

161,77

4

16,206

0,003*

2–3

2–4

Internal Motivation

17–20 Age

21–24 Age

25-28Age

29–33 Age

Aged 34 and above

84

102

58

28

47

148,57

136,64

184,55

221,11

164,41

4

24,687

0,000*

2–3

2–4

1–4

*p < 0,05; Group 1:17–20 age; Group 2: 21–24 age; Group 3: 25–28 age; Group 4: 29–33 age; Group 5:aged 34 and above

Table 3

The distribution of the points of leisure perception according to educational status variable

 

Educational Status

N

Mean Rank

SD

X2

p

Difference

Perceived Freedom

Highschool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

186,88

149,59

173,88

2

8203

0,017*

1–2

Working Relationship

Highschcool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

159,31

149,26

195,98

2

12,524

0,002*

2–3

Social Interaction

Hishschool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

155,72

153,16

185,83

2

6265

0,044*

2–3

Use of Leisure

Highschool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

187,16

146,79

182,92

2

12,448

0,002*

1–2

2–3

Active-Passive Participation

Highschool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

157,61

152,91

185,21

2

6047

0,049*

2–3

Target Tendency

Highschool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

188,70

142,91

194,55

2

21,096

0,000*

1–2

2–3

Perceived Competence

Highschool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

168,84

151,94

179,87

2

5019

0,081

 

Internal Motivation

Highschool

Bachelor’s Degree

Postgraduate

48

208

63

201,85

145,21

176,93

2

17,600

0,000*

1–2

2–3

*p < 0,05; Group 1:Highschool; Group 2: Bachelor’s Degree; Group 3: Postgraduate

Table 4

The distribution of the points of leisure perception according to experience variable

 

Experience

N

Mean Rank

SD

X2

p

Difference

Perceived Freedom

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

152,03

173,00

174,80

189,05

3

5431

0,143

 

Working Relationship

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

149,71

179,45

186,43

180,85

3

8377

0,039*

1–2

Social Interaction

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

150,39

178,26

183,43

180,68

3

7305

0,063

 

Use of Leisure

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

146,51

184,66

197,91

186,18

3

14,609

0,002*

1–2

Active-Passive Participation

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

149,90

180,40

173,83

190,48

3

8374

0,039*

1–2

Target Tendency

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

148,88

173,02

175,09

222,48

3

14,454

0,002*

1–4

Perceived Competence

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

146,82

172,04

203,65

214,80

3

17,887

0,000*

1–3

1–4

Internal Motivation

1–3 years

4–7 years

8–11 years

12 years and more

215

61

23

20

152,38

173,94

175,35

181,75

3

4677

0,197

 

*p < 0,05; Group 1:1–3 years; Group 2: 4–7 years; Group 3: 8–11 years; Group 4: 12 years and more

Table 5

The distribution of the points of leisure perception according to job variable

 

Job

N

Mean Rank

SD

X2

p

Perceived Freedom

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

175,97

156,14

150,19

2

4197

0,123

Working Relationship

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

162,37

159,03

159,02

2

0,088

0,957

Social Interaction

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

165,34

159,13

156,22

2

0,503

0,778

Use of Leisure

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

169,26

159,72

151,98

2

1737

0,420

Active-Passive Participation

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

164,48

167,56

146,93

2

3156

0,206

Target Tendency

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

170,10

164,69

145,29

2

4146

0,126

Perceived Competence

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

165,97

154,31

161,40

2

0,894

0,639

Internal Motivation

Private Sector

Publis Sector

Student

93

123

103

177,70

154,48

150,61

2

5003

0,082

Table 6

The distribution of the points of leisure perception according to outdoor sport branches

 

Outdoor Sport Branches

N

Mean Rank

SD

X2

p

Perceived Freedom

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

148,58

171,60

158,98

173,75

145,62

4

4728

0,316

Working Relationship

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

142,75

172,36

156,39

161,34

156,59

4

4680

0,322

Social Interaction

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

156,59

169,84

151,67

139,31

157,16

4

2843

0,584

Use of Leisure

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

142,07

172,49

143,62

174,88

166,09

4

7269

0,122

Active-Passive Participation

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

154,98

160,88

152,59

164,34

169,99

4

1311

0,859

Target Tendency

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

145,19

164,64

156,09

160,84

170,51

4

2907

0,573

Perceived Competence

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

141,04

167,82

160,97

169,44

161,23

4

3861

0,425

Internal Motivation

Mountain Climbing

Hiking

Paragliging

Mountain Biking

Rock Climbing

65

122

58

16

58

147,23

163,61

145,00

176,78

177,09

4

5567

0,234

3 Findings

The leisure perception of outdoor sports were examined according to their gender, and important differences were found (p < 0,05) statistically in the sub-dimesions, which are perceived freedom, social interaction, and internal motivation.

The leisure perception of outdoor sporters were examined according to their age, and important differences were found (p < 0,05) statistically in the sub-dimesions, which are perceived freedom, working relationship, social interaction, use of leisure, active-passive participation, target tendency, perceived competence and internal motivation.

The leisure perception of outdoor sporters were examined according to educational status, and important differences were found (p < 0,05) statistically in the sub-dimesions, which are perceived freedom, use of leisure, active-passive participation, target tendency, perceived competence and internal motivation.

The leisure perception of outdoor sporters were examined according to experience, and important differences were found (p < 0,05) statistically in the sub-dimesions, which are use of leisure, working relationship, active-passive participation, target tendency and perceived competence.

The leisure perception of outdoor sporters was examined according to their jobs, and no important differences were detected statistically.

The leisure perception of outdoor sporters was examined according to their outdoor sport branches, and no important differences were detected statistically.

4 Discussion and Conclusion

The aim of this research is to examine the leisure perception of the individuals who do outdoor sports according to some demographic variables. The research is considered important in terms of taking a developer step for outdoor sports and making more productive and better plans and programmes for outdoor sports during leisure.

According to a research made by Ajans Press, which is media monitoring agency centre from Radio and Television Supreme Council data, Turkey is the leader of watching TV, which for 330 min on daily basis. It is followed by Japan for 265 min, by Italy for 261 min, by Poland for 247 min, by Spain for 244 min, by Russia for 239 min etc. (www.haberturk.tv, 2017). It is understood from these statistics that a major part of leisure is spent by watching TV. How to spend leisure or how to benefit from leisure has been a quite attractive subject for many researchers. In this context, researchers tend to spend time in nature. Olivier (2006) also mentions that outdoor sports which attract more attention should be organized and answers the questions related to why these sports should be done according to certain rules and laws. Thus, outdoor sports are among the type of sports which require a specific discipline.

In our research some important and statistically differences were reached in terms of gender, age, education and experience on doing outdoor sports. No important and statistically differences were reached in terms of outdoor sports branches and job.

The reason of this fact is that most of physical activities were chosen by men because they are stronger than women in terms of body structure (Kane 1990). In our reseach the number of male participant is more (n = 180). According to gender variable, it is seen that women are at the forefront on sub-dimensions of perceived freedom, social interaction and internal motivation. Women feel morefree in outdoor sports, have more interaction with the environment and feel happier in their inner world. Hudson (2000) mentions about serious differences on the participation in leisure activities between the number of men and women. According to Demir and Demir (2006), there are differences on significance level of factors effecting the participating the gender and participation in leisure activities of individuals. Esentaş and Özbey (2016), mentions about the fact that female students are less eager to attend leisure activites. These results support our findings. As a result, it is found that women have higher perception about outdoor sports, which means that women interiorise doing outdoor sports during their leisure. Accordingly, by considering responsibilities taken by women such as housework, working, looking after children etc., to do outdoor sports is more relaxing and pleasant for them.

According to age variable, statistically important differences were found in terms of sub-dimension of perceived freedom, working relationship, social interaction, use of leisure, active-passive participation, target tendency, perceived competence and internal motivation. According to age variable, statistically important differences were found in terms of sub-dimensions of perceived freedom, working relationship, social interaction, use of leisure, active-passive participation, target tendency, perceived competence and internal motivation. Correspondingly, the highest result is that the sporters being 29–33 have high internal motivation. In general, in all sub-dimensions, individuals being 25–28 and 29–33 have higher points. Based on this, it can be said that youngsters have more perception on outdoor sports and participate more. Youngsters would like to do outdoor sports more. Kunz and Graham (1996) give a place to the fact that youngsters tend to participate in physical activities more compared to elders. It is coincided with our results. It could be said that youngsters do outdoor sports more. It is also thought that it is related to physical well-being and performance.

According to education variable, high school and M.A. graduates stand out. People who graduate from high school have more point in terms of sub-dimensions of perceived freedom, use of leisure and internal motivation. People graduating from bachelor’s degree stand out in terms of sub-dimensions of working relationship, social interaction, active-passive participation, target tendency and perceived competence. Accordingly, people who graduate from high school and bachelor’s degree have higher perception on the fact that they do outdoor sports during their leisure time. It could be said that they feel more free and happier while they do outdoor sports. The higher the education level is, the more sociable the perception of leisure tends to be, such as crowded activities, and to target-driven activites, such as to participate in only exciting activities. In his research, Sağcan (1986) determines that the desire of seeing new places and new things are rising directly related to educational level.

In outdoor sports, according to experience variable statistically important differences were found in terms of sub-dimension of working relationship, use of leisure, active - passive participation, target tendency and perceived competence. The participants have, in general, 1–3 year experience. As the point, the highest one is the target tendency of the participants who are experienced for 12 years and more (S.O = 222,48; p < 0.05. It could be said that these people participate in the activities they determine. As a remarkable result, people have more experience have high ‘perceived competence’ points (S.O = 214,80; p < 0.05). It could be explained that experienced outdoor sporters participate in the activities in which they are competent. Each of age group participates in leisure activities in some way. It is seen that to be experienced is a key on the choice of activity.

In our research, according to the branch of outdoor sport and job no statistically important result was found. People working in the public participate in outdoor sports more. Correspondingly, it could be said that people working in the public sector have more leisure and prefer outdoor sports more as long as they have got time. It can be explained that people who work in the private sector lead a busier life. Apart from that, in general, people who work in the private sector have more points. From this point of view, people working in the private sector spend their leisure more productive by doing outdoor sports and they do willingly. People working in the private sector feel more free, happier, more sociable and more competent, which is explained with the fact that they have leisure sincerely and qualitatively. It is known that private sector has busier and more stressed job environment. It seen that according to outdoor sports branch variable, the points are moderate. Hiking and mountain climbing are done most. In his research, Cordell (2008), mentions about the fact that hiking, which is a kind of outdoor sport, has more tendency on participation 14% and trekking has more tendency on participation 16%. It is thought that the participation in other branches has less tendency inasmuch as there are more risks in them. In general, people spending their leisure with mountain climbing, hiking, paragliding, mountain biking and rock climbing are content with them. According to Fasching et al. (1997), the fact that people look for new and more adventurous sports has made paragliding a popular sport. It explains that participation in paragliding is over expectations. Olivier (2006) mentions about the tendency to leisure activites has risen together with extreme sports. By taking into consideration participation, our research verifies it.

Consequently, outdoor sports are the types of activities preferred during leisure. It can be said that they present all the opportunities to participating individuals. Doing outdoor sports during leisure is understood as an activity sustaining individuals high freedom feeling, giving happiness, making them sociable, creating activity opportunity according to their competence, presenting an activity aimed, letting them use their leisure in the most productive way and providing support on working relationship. Doing outdoor sports is very important in terms of getting into social interaction for youngsters. Utilizing leisure by doing an outdoor sport provides important achievements on individuals. It is suggested that individuals at every age should be directed to do outdoor sports, organize places and raceways for outdoor sports.

Notes

References

  1. Ardahan, F., & Yerlisu Lapa, T. (2011). Açıkalan Rekreasyonu: Bisiklet Kullanıcıları ve Yürüyüşçülerin Doğa Sporu Yapma Nedenleri ve Elde Ettikleri Faydalar. Uluslararası İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi, 8(1), 1327–1341.Google Scholar
  2. Aslan, Z. (1992). Termal Turizm işletmelerinde Hizmet Standartlarının Geliştirilmesi ve Pazarlama Faaliyetine Etkisi - Balçova Termal Merkezi Uygulaması. Yayınlanmamış Yüksek Lisans Tezi. Dokuz Eylül Üniversitesi: Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü.Google Scholar
  3. Çelebi, M., Özbey, S., & Güzel, P. (2012). Eğitimde ve gelişiminde rekreasyonun rolü, 1. In Rekreasyon Araştırmaları Kongresi (pp. 192–201). Antalya.Google Scholar
  4. Cordell, H. K. (2008). The latest trends in nature-based outdoor recreation (pp. 7–8). Forest history today, Spring.Google Scholar
  5. Demir, C., & Çevirgen, A. (2006). Turizm ve Çevre Yönetimi: Sürdürülebilir Gelişme Yaklaşımı. Ankara: Nobel Yayın Dağıtım.Google Scholar
  6. Demir, C., & Demir, N. (2006). Bireylerin Boş Zaman Faaliyetlerine Katılmalarını Etkileyen Faktörler İle Cinsiyet Arasındaki İlişki: Lisans Öğrencilerine Yönelik Bir Uygulama. Ege Academic Review. Ekonomi, İşletme, Uluslararası İlişkiler ve Siyaset Bilimi Dergisi, 6(1), 36–48.Google Scholar
  7. Esentaş, M., & Özbey, S. (2016). Bir Serbest Zaman Etkinliği Olarak; Gençlik ve Spor Bakanlığınca Uygulanan Gençlik Kampları Programları, Uluslararası Spor. Egzersiz ve Antrenman Bilimi Dergisi, 2(2), 66–72.Google Scholar
  8. Esteve, R., Martin, J., & San-Lopez, A. E. (1999). Grasping the meaning of leisure: Developing a self- report measurement tool. Leisure Studies, 18(2), 79–91.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Fasching, G., Schippinger, G., & Pretscher, R. (1997). Paragliding accidents in remote areas. Wilderness & Environmental Medicine, 8, 129–133.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Godbey, G. (2009). Outdoor recreation, health, and wellness. In Understanding and Enhancing the Relationship Resources for the Future May (pp. 1–29).Google Scholar
  11. Graydon, D., & Hanson, K. (2005). Dağcılık Zirvelerin Özgürlüğü. Çev: Tunç Fındık. Homer Kitabevi ve Yayıncılık Ltd. Şti.Google Scholar
  12. Gürbüz, B., Özdemir, A. S., & Karaküçük, S. (2007). Meaning of leisure time scale: Evaluation of psycho-metric characteristics on turkish university students. International mediterranean sport science congress book of abstracts. Antalya.Google Scholar
  13. Gürer, B. (2012). Investigating The Leadership Skills In Outdoor Sports & Search And Rescue. Abant İzzet Baysal University: Unpublished PhD thesis.Google Scholar
  14. HaberTürk, (2017). http://www.haberturk.tv/yasam/haber/1449084-turkiye-acik-ara-zirvede/8. Erişim Tarihi 05. Nisan 2017.
  15. Hall, C. M., & Page, S. J. (1999). The geography of tourism and recreation: 48 Environment, Place and Space. London and New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  16. Hudson, S. (2000). The segmentation of potential tourists: Constraint differences between men and women. Journal of Travel Research, 38(4), 363–368.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kane, M. J. (1990). Female involvement in physical recreation: Gender role as constraint. Journal of Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance, 61, 52–56.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kelly, J. R. (1990). Leisure. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Englewood, Cliffs.Google Scholar
  19. Kunz, J. L., & Graham, K. (1996). Life Cource changes in alcohol consumption in leisure activities of men and women. Journal of Drug, 26, 805–827.Google Scholar
  20. McEvoy, G. M. (1997). Organizational change and outdoor management education. Human Resource Management, Summer, 36(2), 235–250.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. McKenzie, M. D. (2000). How are adventure education program outcomes achieved? A review of the literatüre. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education, 5(1), 19–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Mieczkowski, Z. (1990). World trend in tourism and recreation. New York: Peter Lang Publishing.Google Scholar
  23. Olivier, S. (2006). Moral dilemmas of participation on dangerous leisure activities. Leisure Studies, 25(1), 95–109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Roberts, K. (2006). Leisure in contemporary society (2.baskı). Wallingford: Cabi.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Sağcan, M. (1986). Rekreasyon ve Turizm. İzmir: Cumhuriyet Basımevi.Google Scholar
  26. Wagner, R. J., Baldwin, T. T., & Roland, C. C. (1991). Outdoor training: Revolution or fad? Training and Development Journal, 45(3), 51–55.Google Scholar
  27. Yerlisu Lapa, T., & Ardahan, F. (2009). Akdeniz Üniversitesi Öğrencilerinin Serbest Zaman Etkinliklerine Katılım Nedenleri ve Değerlendirme Biçimleri. Hacettepe Journal of Sport Sciences, 20(4), 132–144.Google Scholar
  28. Yerlisu Lapa, T., Ardahan, F., & Yıldız, F. (2010). 11. Uluslararası Spor Bilimleri Kongresi: Bisiklet etkinliklerine katılan bireylerin profilleri, bu Sporu yapma nedenleri ve elde ettikleri faydalar. Türkiye: Antalya.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Physical Education and SportGaziantep UniversityGaziantepTurkey
  2. 2.Faculty of Business AdministrationMarmara UniversityIstanbulTurkey

Personalised recommendations