Evaluating the Efficacy of a Self-classification Measure of Recreation Specialization in the Context of Ultimate Frisbee

ExECUtivE SUMMaR y: Recreation and land managers have not had a simple method of segmenting participants within the same activity. Research on recreational specialization may be particularly useful to this end given its emphasis on investigating diversity among recreationists involved in the same activity. Whereas previous studies viewed specialization as a process of progression through stages, this study emphasizes how specialization can be conceived in terms of distinct styles of participation. Styles of participation are a combination of attitudes, behaviors, and interests that characterize people’s involvement in leisure activities. Building on the work of Scott, Ditton, Stoll, and Eubanks (2005), we propose there are three generic styles of participation that exist along the specialization continuum: Casual, Active, and Serious. These styles can be measured in the form of a self-classification tool that has activity participants choose a style which best reflects their experiences. We created a self-classification measure to study Ultimate Frisbee players who live in the Southwestern United States. The self-classification tool was compared with traditional recreation specialization classification measures and proved to be a simple, easy to use alternative for segmenting same-activity participants. Results showed that the self-classification measure did a very good job of predicting Ultimate Frisbee players’ motivations when compared with an additive index and cluster analysis classification. These results suggest that the self-classification measure can be a worthwhile tool to recreation and land managers for understanding style of participation and intensity of involvement among participants. It may be particularly useful for tournament organizers as a technique for placing participants in specific events or divisions.

[1]  R. Stebbins Serious Leisure: A Perspective for Our Time , 2006 .

[2]  David Steven Scott,et al.  Measuring Specialization among Birders: Utility of a Self-Classification Measure , 2005 .

[3]  D. Scott,et al.  Measuring Birding Specialization: A Confirmatory Factor Analysis , 2004 .

[4]  David Steven Scott,et al.  Understanding the Birder as Tourist: Segmenting Visitors to the Texas Hummer /Bird Celebration , 2003 .

[5]  I. Schneider,et al.  Specialization among mountaineers and its relationship to environmental attitudes. , 2003 .

[6]  G. Hvenegaard,et al.  Birder Specialization Differences in Conservation Involvement, Demographics, and Motivations , 2002 .

[7]  Robert A. Stebbins,et al.  New Directions in the Theory and Research of Serious Leisure , 2001 .

[8]  D. Loomis,et al.  Development and Validation of a Specialization Index and Testing of Specialization Theory , 2001 .

[9]  B. McFarlane Comments On Recreational Specialization: A Critical Look At The Construct , 2001 .

[10]  H. Bryan Reply to David Scott and C. Scott Shafer, “Recreational Specialization: A Critical Look at the Construct” , 2001 .

[11]  H. Bryan Comments on the paper by David Scott and C. Scott Shafer. , 2001 .

[12]  Roger L. Moore,et al.  Recreational Specialization: A Critical Look at the Construct , 2001 .

[13]  W. Kuentzel How Specialized is Specialization Research? , 2001 .

[14]  D. Kerstetter,et al.  Level of Specialization and Place Attachment: An Exploratory Study of Whitewater Recreationists , 2000 .

[15]  Craig A. Miller,et al.  Degree and Range of Specialization Across Related Hunting Activities , 2000 .

[16]  Jamie S. Cole,et al.  Segmenting participation in wildlife watching: A comparison of casual wildlife watchers and serious birders , 1999 .

[17]  Peter C. Boxall,et al.  Past Experience and Behavioral Choice Among Wilderness Users , 1998 .

[18]  T. Heberlein,et al.  Social Status, Self-Development, and the Process of Sailing Specialization , 1997 .

[19]  Steven R. Martin Specialization and differences in setting preferences among wildlife viewers , 1997 .

[20]  B. McFarlane,et al.  Socialization influences of specialization among birdwatchers , 1996 .

[21]  G. Godbey,et al.  Recreation Specialization in the Social World of Contract Bridge , 1994 .

[22]  C. McDonald,et al.  Differential effects of past experience, commitment, and lifestyle dimensions on river use specialization. , 1992 .

[23]  R. Stebbins Amateurs, Professionals, and Serious Leisure , 1992 .

[24]  J. Pigram,et al.  Recreation specialization reexamined: The case of vehicle‐based campers , 1992 .

[25]  N. Mcintyre The personal meaning of participation: enduring involvement , 1989 .

[26]  L. A. Helfrich,et al.  Recreational Specializations and Motivations of Virginia River Anglers , 1988 .

[27]  Randy J. Virden,et al.  Recreation Specialization As an Indicator of Environmental Preference , 1988 .

[28]  J. Vaske,et al.  Degree and Range of Recreation Specialization: Toward a Typology of Boating Related Activities , 1986 .

[29]  R. Stebbins Serious leisure , 1982 .

[30]  D. Unruh,et al.  Characteristics And Types Of Participation In Social Worlds , 1979 .

[31]  H. Bryan Leisure Value Systems and Recreational Specialization: The Case of Trout Fishermen , 1977 .

[32]  S. Baker,et al.  Motivations and commitments among participants in the great Texas birding classic , 1999 .

[33]  R. Stebbins Casual leisure: a conceptual statement , 1997 .

[34]  R. Ditton,et al.  Recreation Specialization: Re-conceptualization from a Social Worlds Perspective , 1992 .

[35]  T. Heberlein,et al.  Does specialization affect behavioral choices and quality judgments among hunters , 1992 .

[36]  Thomas Buchanan,et al.  Commitment and leisure behavior: A theoretical perspective , 1985 .

[37]  B. Hobson Conflict in the great outdoors. , 1979 .