What Do We Get from Leisure? Its Costs

Part of the Leisure Studies in a Global Era book series (LSGE)


The costs that come with leisure activities are covered first. Next, those costs are examined for their fit in the common sense imagery of leisure as well as in the scientific theory and research that strives to explain it. These leisure costs, conceived of here as either situational or inherent, have been identified as tensions, dislikes, and disappointments. They are examined as they are experienced in serious, casual, and project-based leisure. Selfishness in leisure can be a cost, though it is not part of leisure’s negative common sense image. Moreover, the victims of selfishness associated with a free-time activity know intimately the effects of this attitude, even while they seem to share the common sense image of leisure held by the general public.


Costs Serious leisure Casual leisure Project-based leisure Selfishness Common sense 


  1. Breeze, M. (2015). Seriousness and women’s roller derby: Gender, organization, and ambivalence. Houndmills, UK: Palgrave Macmillan.Google Scholar
  2. Codina, N. (1999). Tendencias emergentes en el comportamiento de ocio: El ocio serio y su evaluación. Revista de Psicología Social, 14, 331–346.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Economist (The). (2016). Googling at Britain, 12 March, p. 56.Google Scholar
  4. Frey, B. S. (2008). Happiness: A revolution in economics. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Gillespie, D. L., Leffler, A., & Lerner, E. (2002). If it weren’t my hobby, I’d have a life: Dog sports, serious leisure, and boundary negotiations. Leisure Studies, 21, 285–304.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Harries, G. D., & Currie, R. R. (1998). Cognitive dissonance: A consequence of serious leisure. World Leisure & Recreation, 40(3), 36–41.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Lamont, M., & Kennelly, M. (2012). A qualitative exploration of participant motives among committed amateur triathletes. Leisure Sciences, 34, 236–255.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Lee, Y., Dattilo, J., & Howard, D. (1994). The complex and dynamic nature of leisure experience. Journal of Leisure Research, 26, 195–211.Google Scholar
  9. Pedlar, A. (1996). Community development: What does it mean for recreation and leisure. Journal of Applied Recreation Research, 21, 5–23.Google Scholar
  10. Ploch, L. (1976). Community development in action: A case study. Journal of Community Development and Society, 7, 8.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Roberts, K. (1999). Leisure in contemporary society. Wallingford, Oxon: CABI.Google Scholar
  12. Scott, D. (2003). Constraints. In J. M. Jenkins & J. J. Pigram (Eds.), Encyclopedia of leisure and outdoor recreation (pp. 75–78). London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  13. Siegenthaler, K. L., & Gonsalez, G. L. (1997). Youth sports as serious leisure: A critique. Journal of Sport & Social Issues, 21, 298–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Stebbins, R. A. (1979). Amateurs: On the margin between work and leisure. Beverly Hills, CA: Sage. (Also available at
  15. Stebbins, R. A. (1981). The social psychology of selfishness. The Canadian Review of Sociology and Anthropology, 18, 82–92.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Stebbins, R. A. (1992). Amateurs, professionals, and serious leisure. Montreal, QC and Kingston, ON: McGill-Queen’s University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Stebbins, R. A. (1995). Leisure and selfishness: An exploration. In G. S. Fain (Ed.), Reflections on the philosophy of leisure, Vol. II, Leisure and ethics (pp. 292–303). Reston, VA: American Alliance for Health, Physical Education, Recreation, and Dance.Google Scholar
  18. Stebbins, R. A. (2009a). Personal decisions in the public square: Beyond problem solving into a positive sociology. New Brunswick, NJ: Transaction.Google Scholar
  19. Swarns, R. L. (2002). Working men in purple, Kings of African evening. New York Times, 6 June (online edition).Google Scholar
  20. Turkle, S. (2010). Alone together: Why we expect more from technology and less from each other. New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar
  21. U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2015). American time use survey. Washington, DC: Government of the United States.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of SociologyUniversity of CalgaryCalgaryCanada

Personalised recommendations