Group Title: leisure preferences of older adults
Title: The leisure preferences of older adults
CITATION THUMBNAILS PAGE IMAGE ZOOMABLE
Full Citation
STANDARD VIEW MARC VIEW
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00102780/00001
 Material Information
Title: The leisure preferences of older adults
Physical Description: Book
Language: English
Creator: Tango, Robert Anthony, 1946-
Copyright Date: 1986
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00102780
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.
Resource Identifier: ltuf - AEQ8978
oclc - 16865073

Full Text












THE LEISURE PREFERENCES OF OLDER ADULTS


by

ROBERT ANTHONY TANGO
















A DISSERTATION PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN
PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS
FOR THE DEGREE OF DOCTOR OF PHILOSOPHY




UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA


1986
































Copyright 1986

by

Robert Anthony Tango


































To my Family
















ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS


This study would have not been possible without the

support, encouragement, guidance, and cooperation of many

faculty members, many administrators of a variety of both

public and private centers for older adults, and friends and

associates of mine. I would like to thank Dr. Harold Riker

for introducing me to the need for research on older adults

and for helping me define the scope and form of this

dissertation, and Dr. Larry Loesch for helping me get

started. I would like to acknowledge the computer

programming of Silom Horwitz, my older adult neighbor

without whose lavish patience and understanding this study

would have floundered. I would like to thank Dr. Charles

Dzubian and my friend Roy Reber whose patience and

encouragement helped me through various dilemmas and

doldrums I encountered along the way. I appreciate the

encouragement and information given to me by Dr. Robert

Beland. Without the guidance, structure, and patience of

all of these people, I might have never finished.

Thanks are also due to the many professionals at the

District VII Office of the State of Florida Department of










Health and Rehabilitative Services, the Jewish Community

Center in Maitland, FL, the Casselberry Senior Center,

Seminole County Mental Health Association, and other

agencies and individuals who encouraged their clients to

participate in this study.

To Marilyn, my wife, I extend my love in appreciation

for countless hours she spent alone facing three creative

children while I worked on this study.

To my delightful children, Lisa, Robert, and Lindsay,

whose faces are a source of honest joy for me; to my father,

Anthony Tango, whose desire for me to succeed at this

project was a continuous source of courage for me; and, to

the hundreds of older adults who took a good deal of their

time patiently waiting for me to get my equipment set up and

answering my many questions, I express my gratitude.
















TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS......................................iv
LIST OF TABLES......................................viii
ABSTRACT................................................... xi
CHAPTER

I INTRODUCTION.................................

The Need for Leisure Preference Research..... 2
Rationale for This Study...................... 5
Purpose of the Study.......................... 6
Theoretical Basis for Study ..................6
Definition of Terms .......................... 8
Organization of the Remainder of the
Study......................................... 9

II REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE......................10

Introduction................................. 10
Descriptions of Older Adults in the United
States .................................. . i
Leisure Defined .............................16
Quality of Life and Leisure................. 18
Research on Older Adult Leisure.............23
Studies on Leisure Choice Determinants.......29
A Paradigm for Leisure Preference...........30
Summary .... ................................33

III METHODOLOGY.................................35

Hypotheses... ............................... 35
Procedures................................... 36
Instrumentation.............................. 40
Subjects .................................... 43
Data Collection Procedures ..................46
Data Analyses ...............................49
Limitations................................. 52

IV RESULTS .....................................55

Data Transformations ........................56
Sample Characteristics.......................56
Descriptions of General and Intermediate
Dependent Variables........................ 57










Explanation of the Cluster Analysis of 28
General Leisure Activities................63
Discriminating Gender, Race, and Age by
Using Unique Clusters of Variables........93
Analysis of Intermediate Dependent
Variable Components in Relationship to
Significant Predictor Variables...........97
Analyses of Specific Level Leisure
Preferences Statements in Terms of
Race, Gender, and Age Demographics.........99

V DISCUSSION ............................... 125

Hypotheses ................................. 126
Patterns.................................... 129
Conclusions ................................ 129
Implications. .......................... 131
Suggestions for Further Research...........134
Summary ................................... 139

APPENDICES

A AVOCATIONAL ACTIVITIES INVENTORY...........140
B DEFINITIONS OF SOCIAL-PSYCHOLOGICAL
FACTORS AND EXERTION FACTORS.............154

REFERENCES................................................. 156

BIOGRAPHICAL SKETCH ..................................164


vii
















LIST OF TABLES


TABLE Page

1 Description and Range of Predictor Variables..........38

2 Component Activity Totals in Leisure Hierarchy
for Each Level ........................................39

3 Sites Where Subjects Were Surveyed.................... 45

4 Symbols and Explanations Printed on Computer Screen...48

5 Projected and Actual Number Totals for Sample
Representation........................................... 59

6 Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, Skewness, and
Kurtosis for General Level Leisure Activities....... 60

7 Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, Skewness, and
Kurtosis for Intermediate Level Leisure
Activities ........ ..................................61

8 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Gender Subgroup Men .................................69

9 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Gender Subgroup Women ...............................70

10 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Education Subgroup Elementary .......................71

11 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Education Subgroup High School....................... 72

12 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Education Subgroup College........................... 73

13 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Race Subgroup White .................................74

14 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Race Subgroup Black .................................75

15 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Occupation Subgroup Data ............................76


viii










16 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Occupation Subgroup People........................... 77

17 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Occupation Subgroup Things ..........................78

18 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Occupation Subgroup Ideas ...........................79

19 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Physical Subgroup Not Restricted....................80

20 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Physical Subgroup Restricted.........................81

21 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Household Type Subgroup Living With Spouse...........82

22 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Living Conditions Alone .............................83

23 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Household Type Subgroup Group Quarters..............84

24 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Household Type Subgroup Relatives ...................85

25 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Income Subgroup Sufficient ..........................86

26 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Income Subgroup Not Sufficient.......................87

27 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Age Subgroup 60/64 .................................. 88

28 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Age Subgroup 65/69 .................................. 89

29 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Age Subgroup 70/74...................................90

30 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Age Subgroup 75/79....................................91

31 Cluster of General Level Leisure Variables for
Age Subgroup 80/up................................... 92

32 Discriminant Analysis of Age by Selected General
Activities...........................................95

33 Discriminant Analysis of Gender by Selected General
Activities .......................................... 95










34 Discriminant Analysis of Race by Selected General
Activities ..........................................96

35 Mean, Standard Deviation, and F and P Value for
Intermediate Activities Related to Race............100

36 Mean, Standard Deviation, and F and P Value for
Intermediate Activities Related to Gender..........102

37 Mean, Standard Deviation, and F and P Value for
Intermediate Activities Related to Age.............104

38 Frequency Counts and Chi-Square Statistics for
Specific Level Preferences in Relation to Gender...111

39 Frequency Counts and Chi-Square Statistics for
Specific Level Preferences in Relation to Age......114

40 Frequency Counts and Chi-Square Statistics for
Specific Level Preferences in Relation to Race.....120
















Abstract of Dissertation Presented to the Graduate School of
the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirement for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy



THE LEISURE PREFERENCES OF OLDER ADULTS


By


Robert Anthony Tango


December, 1986


Chair: Harold C. Riker
Co-Chair: Larry C. Loesch
Major Department: Counselor Education


This study examined the relationship between the

leisure preferences of older adults and their environmental

and demographic characteristics. Previous researchers have

generally supported the thesis that leisure preferences

relate to psychosocial and demographic factors. This study

was intended to determine whether it was possible to

associate the leisure preferences of older adults with

personal characteristics and environmental factors; further,

a preference profile of a representative sample of American

older adults was developed.

Subjects (N= 303) were asked to evaluate their

preferences for leisure activities by responding to an










interactive, microcomputer based version of the Avocational

Activities Inventory (AAI). Results were reported on

General, Intermediate, and Specific levels. Significant

differences (p = <.05) were found in the leisure preferences

of older adults by age, race, and gender, but not by

household type, income, physical limitations, work history,

and level of education.

Three themes were found to be associated with the age,

gender, and race of an older adult. Utilitarian activities

were attractive to 60 64 year olds, but not to adults who

were 80 years old and older. Pre-patterned activities were

attractive to older adult men more than they were to older

adult women. Structured activities were attractive to

whites more so than to blacks. An overall preference

profile established for this sample ranged from preferences

for industrious, productive, and self-improvement activities

to preferences for passive and pensive activities. For

adults 80 years old and older, depression was discussed as a

factor which might be blocking gratification of needs; thus

suggesting that more needs to be done to facilitate a

healthful life for these people.

Suggestions were offered for further research on older

adult activity preferences. The use of interactive computing

with older adults was also discussed.


xii
















CHAPTER I
INTRODUCTION


Older adult leisure preferences are so varied that to

try to isolate their patterns seems an exceedingly difficult

effort; however, discovering the linkages between the

personal characteristics of older adults and their leisure

activity preferences appears worth the effort. With the aid

of such research, older adults may be better able to reduce

or eliminate blocks to activity and to gain new perspectives

on healthful living.

Leisure preferences are different from vocational

interests. They do not relate to the demands of employers,

school curricula, or other achievement hurdles imposed from

without. They relate to the attainment of a satisfying

quality of life and how individuals define pleasure for

themselves. By exploring leisure "favorites," older adults

can get a sense of just how willing they may be to try a

given activity.

The goals of leisure counseling are to find the "most

effective and most appropriate" leisure activities within an

individual's own personal, social, behavioral, and

linguistic contexts (Loesch and Wheeler, 1982, pp. 61-62).










A way to do this is to learn what is "interesting" to an

individual and to determine the magnitude of that interest.

Genuine leisure preferences are personal predictions

regarding the potential best uses of free (i.e.,

discretionary) time. As projections about the future,

preferences are a hope that activity will lead to

satisfaction.


The Need for Leisure Preference Research


Leisure research is needed because parameters are

needed for the interpretation of leisure preferences by both

counselors and older adults. Counselors need effective ways

to help older adults for whom an image of themselves at

leisure is elusive and for whom enjoyment expectations are

often not met and depressive boredom ensues. Gerontologists

also need to develop the techniques and theory of leisure

counseling. Doing basic research may therefore lead to the

development of psychometric instruments for older adults

which relate specifically to leisure time (Wiggins, 1982).

Lack of objective analyses of leisure services has

often resulted in poor planning of leisure activities for

older adults. Relying on traditional "participation

patterns," leisure services providers have typically based

their activity schedules on ritualized views of older adult

leisure preference. Service providers have developed "type"

impressions. For example, Kelly (1982) reports

participation grouping labels such as "active-diversionary,"









"adolescent-social," "aesthetic-sophisticate," and "slow

living." He comments that such labels are not stable and

are often accompanied by unscientifically adopted methods

and results. Staff of human service organizations, private

recreation centers, and therapeutic service centers need to

become what Vacc and Loesch (1984, p. 127) call "scientific

practitioners"--practitioners who are dynamic and who can

react to the needs of their clients. Scientific inquiry

into the preferences of older adults therefore may uncover

ways to make better counseling, planning, and resource

allocation decisions.

Unlike the structured demands of worker roles which

face younger adults, unstructured demands face the older

adult in the shape of large blocks of free time. Lack of

insight and planning are immature reactions to aging

(Johnson and Riker, 1981) which impede the assertion of

leisure preferences and the pursuit of a healthful life.

Lack of self-knowledge, poor self-concept, and lack of

knowledge about alternatives and community resources also

block life satisfaction. "Leisure immaturity" in old age

may intensify emotional reactions to aging and become

debilitating when not understood.

Older persons' needs for feeling involved and connected

in later years are increasing because the life expectancy of

Americans is at an all time high and the age-adjusted death

rate is at a record low (National Center for Health

Statistics, 1980). More time and more leisure alternatives










exist for modern older adults than in the past. Leisure in

later years involves older adults in an American culture

which extols activity and fears boredom. In epidemiological

terms, helping older adults achieve a leisurely life is a

form of "primary prevention" (D'Andrea, 1984) of mental

illness.

Perhaps more than any other age group, older adults

rely on leisure activity as a way to relax and enjoy life

(Osgood, 1982). Leisure offers the opportunity for social,

personal, and health benefits. Older adults gain

self-respect and identity from leisure participation, just

as work offers these benefits to younger people (Kleiber and

Thompson, 1980). Anderson and Burdman (1981) found that

health personnel ranked improving quality of life as a

primary treatment goal for older adults because it mitigates

against the effects of illness in aging. Social service

personnel and educational planners realize and emphasize the

need for meaningful leisure activity in'the reduction of

later life stress and the maintenance of the health and

welfare of the older adult (Lawton, 1978). Research is

needed to stop the rapidly increasing population of older

adults from turning into a demographic disaster in the

future.










Rationale for This Study


Throughout the U.S. older adults have many lifestyles

and also frequently have flexible societal roles by virtue

of having large blocks of free time. In order to obtain an

adequate sample of these variations, large older adult

congregations of tourists and residents in East Central

Florida were chosen. Local senior centers, small home

parties, health fairs, congregate living facilities, and

congregate meal centers were populated by mostly local

residents. Shopping malls and retirement exhibitions had a

mixture of older adult tourists and local residents.

In order to understand how different lifestyles might

be predictive of leisure preferences, a wide range of

leisure activity options needed to be presented for their

evaluation. The advent of low cost computers provided an

"appliance" with which a wide range of options could be

displayed to participants without inconveniencing them. A

microcomputer program was therefore written which allowed

older adults to skip through leisure activity preference

choices with as much or as little specificity as they might

desire. In this way, literally hundreds of specific activity

choices were presented uniformly.










Purpose of the Study


Because older adults differ from one another in many

ways and to remarkable extents, the purpose of this study

was to determine the leisure preferences of older adults in

selected lifestyles and demographic combinations. It

followed that in order to understand older adults and their

leisure preference, it was necessary to observe and analyze

specific sets of preferences as they interacted in

association with specific demographic and lifestyle factors.

Two research questions were addressed:


1. What are the leisure activity preferences of older

adults in various life settings; e.g., living alone, in

congregate living facilities, living with spouse, living

with relatives?


2. How are leisure preferences related to the gender,

age, race, previous work history, physical condition,

household type, and income level of older adults?


Theoretical Basis for Study


As a theoretical basis for the study of older adult

leisure preference, an ecological model (Lewin, 1951) was

followed. Lewin (1935) believed that rigid cause-and-effect

relationships do not exist in preference data. He stated

that psychological events are temporallyy extended wholes

(of the type, for example, of a melody ...)" (p. 44).










Studied as temporallyy extended wholes," leisure

preferences are defined as personal value judgments. These

judgments evolve in a "multitude of highly individual

arrangements and life-styles" (Gelatt, 1984, p. 134).

Leisure preference represents an impression about what may

be an enjoyable use of free time, and such impressions may

have started as a purpose, a need, or a "half-finished"

activity. Leisure preference therefore can be assessed in

terms of an expressed attraction (or repulsion) in the life

settings of older adults.

Assessing these attractions (or repulsions), which

Lewin (1935) describes as valences, is a functional approach

to understanding attitudes about leisure. For example, a

negative response to a given leisure category must be

assessed according to an individual's perceptual field. A

negative response may expose latent connections; e.g., older

adults who may really be interested in playing golf will

probably not express that interest if a sharp pain cuts

across their back every time they swing a club.

Lewin's field theory illustrates the important forces

present in the preference assertion process. These forces

steer preference according to individualized "laws" by which

older adults translate their impulses and perceptions into

preference. Relatedly, the concept of life setting or

lifestyle provides a useful bridge between personal value

judgments and surrounding social systems connecting

individual leisure preference to larger, societal events.











Definition of Terms


Leisure: "Leisure is any activity an individual knowingly

(i.e. consciously) chooses to define as leisure"

(Loesch and Wheeler, 1982, p. 36); as activity beyond

that necessary for physical or personal maintenance

which the participant defines as pleasurable and

satisfying (Kelly, 1982); and "discretionary personal

activity in which expressive meanings have primacy over

instrumental themes" (Gordon, Gaitz, and Scott, 1976,

pp. 314-15).

Leisure Preference: "The observable organization of an

individual's choice of activity in terms of use of

time, investment of energy, and choice of interpersonal

objects" (Bengston, 1973, p. 37).

Leisure Counseling: A process for helping someone utilize

options for enjoying leisure time (Loesch and Wheeler,

1982, p. 205).

Recreation: The refreshment of strength and spirit after

work or apart from work (Morris, 1973).

Older Adults: Individuals in the later period of human life

during which some capacities increase and others

diminish. In this study, the ages associated with this

period are 60 and above.

Life Satisfaction: The degree to which one is presently

pleased or content with one's general life situation;










one component of individual well-being (George and

Bearon, 1980).

Leisure Setting: A small scale social system which includes

people and inanimate objects, and, within whose time

and space various components interact in an

orderly, established way (Wicker, 1981).

Microcomputer: A desk-top sized computer, commonly

available for 1,000 to 5,000 dollars, and capable of

processing and printing data (Heiserman, 1981).

METs: Standard units of metabolic activity equal to the

amount of oxygen used per kilo of bodyweight by

a 154 pound man each minute while at rest. (Schwartz,

1984).


Organization of the Remainder of the Study


Four chapters comprise the remainder of the study.

Chapter II provides a review of the literature related to

what is known about leisure preference. The methodology of

instrumentation via a computer-interactive model is

discussed in Chapter III. This chapter also includes

information on the Overs' Avocational Activities Inventory

(Overs, Taylor, and Adkins, 1977), sampling techniques,

procedures, data analyses, and potential limitations.

Chapter IV presents the tables of results of the cluster

analyses, discriminant analyses, and tests of significance.

Chapter V presents conclusions, alternative explanations,

results, and suggestions for further research.
















CHAPTER II
REVIEW OF THE LITERATURE


Introduction


In 1900, when those 65 and older numbered approximately

3.1 million, or 4.1% of the U.S. population, the societal

impact of older adult leisure involvement was minimal.

Today, older adults number approximately 26.5 million, or

11.7% of the population, and by the year 2000, this number

will have grown to approximately 35 million, or 13.1% of the

population (Faludi, 1984). The personal preferences of

older Americans for leisure are, and will be, politically,

medically, and economically potent. This trend is

particularly evident in the State of Florida where

approximately 17.5% of the current population is 65 years

old or older (Defendorf, 1984); by the year 2020, nearly 60%

of Florida's population will be over the age of 50 (Beland,

1982). Thus, in Florida, and in other population centers,

the impact of how older adults enjoy themselves is and will

continue to be be great.

Looking for leisure preference parameters follows

logically from trying to increase the pleasure that leisure

participation brings. Relaxation, enjoyment, and challenge










are critically important parts of older adult life.

Non-stressful, enjoyable, and freely selected activities are

similar to the "relaxation response" discussed by Benson

(1975) as being important in the reduction of diseases.

To isolate norms of older adults' preference for

leisure activities reliably and validly (taking into account

the variety of their lifestyles) is indeed a research

challenge. Researchers of older adult "pleasure"

preferences face particularly subtle and complex phenomena

because the developmental, social, and psychological

relationships implicit in this group's preferences evolve

through the experiences, fantasies, and hopes of a lifetime.

This chapter reviews literature on gerontological

leisure and related studies in six sections. The first

contains descriptions of older adults in the United States.

The second section covers a variety of expert and older

adult definitions of leisure. The third section reports on

studies regarding leisure and quality of life. The fourth

section reviews recent research on the leisure preferences

of selected older adult populations. The fifth section

explains a theoretical model of leisure preference as a

function of person-environment interaction. The last

section is a summary.


Descriptions of Older Adults in the United States


Living their later years in the midst of a powerful

gerontocracyy" which is healthier, richer, better educated,







12

and more politically powerful than ever before, older adults

experience both the benefits and stresses of today's social

and economic life. Within the variety of older adult

populations, there is, on the average, more contentment than

among younger people (Faludi, 1984). Their increasing

resources also enable them to choose among more leisure

options than have previous older generations, and they spend

a larger proportion of their money for recreation than did

older adults 30 years ago.

Older adults join in informal networks (family,

friends, co-workers) which mitigate against stress, and they

continue to search for involvement. When surveyed by Booz-

Allen and Hamilton, Inc. (1981), older adults reported that

their overriding, or fundamental, interest was to keep in

touch with meaningful, "belonging-centered" social

connections. An example of this interest is a finding by

Defendorf (1984) that 80% of older adults were parents; 80%

of the parents saw at least one of their children during the

week of the survey, and 55% of them saw at least one of

their children on the day that they answered the survey

questions.

Volunteerism is popular with older adults. In 1981,

approximately 25% of older adults surveyed by the Gallup

Organization indicated that they were currently in a

volunteer's role (Jusenius, 1983). Further, all levels of

government have begun to encourage such volunteerism as a

substitute for government's declining role. Volunteer work










is frequently engaged in by this group in the absence of

part-time work opportunities and generally constricted

access to paid employment.

Harris & Associates (1975) indicated that one-half of

sampled retirees wished that they were working (for pay).

Enhanced by modern advertising stimulation, spending power

has become a major determinant of retirement satisfaction

(Johnson and Riker, 1981). Living costs and fixed incomes

make rigorous financial planning critically important for

older adults (Hazard, 1981).

Although older adults indicate that they want

retirement to be a gradual process, they are most often

faced with the advent of sudden retirement. Part-time work

opportunities are not the norm for this group; older workers

say that they would like to work, but they perceive that

their current jobs are not available on a part-time basis,

and that comparable part-time jobs are rare (Jondrew,

Brechling, and Marcus, 1983).

Despite the many positive aspects of life for today's

older adults, depression is frequent (Landreth and Berg,

1982), primarily because there are many dilemmas facing this

group. Disabilities and a multitude of losses (e.g., job,

sense of self-worth, loved ones, and friends) are frequently

encountered (Hancock, 1982). Almost two-thirds of all women

over 65 are single while only approximately 25% of male

older adults are single (American Council on Life Insurance,

1984). Older adults aged 60 and above represent over 25% of










all recorded suicides in the U.S. (Myers, 1983). Although

fewer than 15% of the elderly are considered poor as

compared to 35% of the elderly 25 years ago, poverty among

the elderly is still a sizable problem. Women account for

nearly 75% of the older adult poor and only 18% of women

receive pensions. For 60% of women over 65 living alone,

social security is their only income (Older Women's League,

1984).

Some diseases, although they may occur earlier in life,

are much more likely to appear in the later years. An

estimated 86% of all older persons have one or more chronic

health problems that limit their daily activities (Myers,

1983). The diseases which appear with greatest frequency

due to aging are Alzheimer's disease, arteriosclerosis,

arthritis, bronchitis and lung disease, cancer, coronary

disease, cataracts, diabetes mellitus, the later stages of

hypertension, and neuritis (Silverstone and Hyman, 1982).

However, despite these afflictions and a hospitalization

rate greater than two and one-half times that for younger

people (Millon, Green, and Meagher, 1982), illness took only

fourth place (after crime, energy costs, and loneliness) in

a 1981 survey of older adult concerns (Defendorf, 1984).

All senses tend to diminish in sensitivity over time.

Sense of balance and psychomotor coordination may begin to

decline after age 50 or 60. On the average, between the

ages of 30 and 70 years, maximum lung capacity decreases

50%, blood pumped by a resting heart decreases 28%, maximum










heart rate decreases 25%, pumping efficiency of the heart

decreases 30%, basal metabolic rate decreases 10%, muscle

strength decreases 12%, muscle coordination decreases 26%,

and hearing of high frequencies decreases 60% (Maranto,

1984).

The quality of routine maintenance of the body,

including diet, rest, exercise, and freedom from stress, has

been shown to offset or delay the decline in acuity in

seeing and hearing. Variation in the sensory decline of

older adults is so great that a new term, "functional age,"

has been coined to refer to the ability level each person

possesses (Van Every, 1983).

The demographics of aging illustrate that older adults

are a resilient and diverse group. Different in physical

and mental capacities, different in social and economic

backgrounds, different in interests and experiences, older

adults are similar only to the extent that each individual

has had the opportunity to be the way he or she is for a

long period of time. Butler (1981) advocates leisure

activity to help put life in perspective, proving to older

adults that their lives have been worthwhile, and

encouraging them to face later years with a will to maximize

their options for pleasure. Older adults need leisure

activity and counselors assisting older adults need to know

more about older adults at leisure.









Leisure Defined


Positive definitions of leisure result from an

individual's judgement of its usefulness within his or her

own time and space, and not out of identification with group

or subculturall" norms (McClelland, 1982). McDowell and

Clark (1982) described three interrelated dimensions of

leisure opinion definitions: (a) expositive or anticipatory

dimension, i.e., looking forward to leisure; (b) thematic

dimension, i.e., the content or environmental configuration

of the leisure activity; and (c) repositive or reflective

dimension, i.e., reminiscing about leisure experiences.

Definitions evolve against a backdrop of disengagement

and continued engagement. Disengagement is defined as a

lifestyle relatively uninvolved with society as a whole,

encompassing within it a wide variety of options dependent

upon health, personality, and socio-economic environment.

The definition of leisure as continued engagement is

pleasurable activity through the continuation of work or

from a second career. For older adults, this definition is

less frequent because of ageism and physical constraints

(Metropoulous, 1980).

Leisure is a self-rewarding activity, sometimes called

residual time or time which is left over after life work

activities are finished (Bull, 1982). Neulinger (1974)

provides a comprehensive psychological definition of

leisure:











Leisure is a state of mind; it is a way of
being, of being at peace with oneself and
what one is doing. (p. xv)
Leisure has one and only one essential
criterion, and that is the condition of perceived
freedom. Any activity carried out freely,
without constraint or compulsion, may be
considered to be leisure. To leisure implies
being engaged in an activity as a free agent and
of one's own choice. (pp. 15-16)


In a study by the Booz-Allen and Hamilton Co., Inc.

(1981) older adults, who were generally at home and viewing

TV well above the average during weekdays and mornings, did

not define leisure as intellectual stimulation. This group

constituted a sample of older adults of whom 67% were 60

years old or older, 12% of whom were black, and 71% of whom

were female.

In a study by Stenrud (1977), institutionalized older

adults conceptualized leisure in a practical way. These

older adults did not separate leisure activity from daily

living. Leisure was an event mixed in within a satisfying

life. Work, family, and play were not viewed separately,

but rather holistically as part of life. Meaningful

activity to the majority of residents meant work, family,

and religion. For many persons born 80 years ago, leisure

as a distinct activity seemed peripheral. For many, leisure

was linked to work in that it had to be earned; leisure

without work was sinful. Many viewed their present,

enforced leisure not as rest but as work aimed at recovery










from illness. This definition of leisure emphasizes its

therapeutic benefits.

Interviews with older adults indicated that their

definitions of leisure were influenced by the type of job

they held before retirement (Roadburg, 1981). Leisure was

not seen in the way younger adults modeled it. The chance

to be free from work was a positive or negative part of

older adult leisure definitions based on whether the older

adult was forced to retire or voluntarily retired.

Historically, older adults have defined leisure in the

context of work. Work is accepted as a responsibility and a

privilege. Leisure as an "occupation" is held with less

acceptance. However, Butler (1981) stated that older adults

who value leisure as being less virtuous than work do not

adequately define the total human life cycle.


Quality of Life and Leisure


Activity choices and life satisfaction, treated as

correlates, have appeared in gerontological literature,

particularly with reference to developmental activity

theory. Social gerontologists have conducted considerable

research geared toward answering the question, what is the

relationship between social participation and life quality

(George and Bearon, 1980)? Research findings generally

support the belief that "something to do" contributes to the










life satisfaction of older adults (Ragheb and Griffith,

1982). Mancini and Orthner (1982) reported a substantial

relationship between psychological well-being and

participation in leisure activities. Satisfaction in later

years was found to be closely related to the quality of

leisure experiences. Seleen (1982) found a significant

amount of variation in life satisfaction beyond that

accounted for by demographic variables. Her results

highlighted the role of activity type and format in

satisfaction. Certain other demographic factors appear to

predispose an older adult to satisfaction with life:

gender, marital status, age, education, financial adequacy,

and health (McClelland, 1982). Van Every (1983) reviewed

several studies on aging and concluded that activity,

income, positive self-perception, positive belief about

physical well-being, and social participation contributed to

a satisfying retirement. Dowd (1980) concluded that

decisions to be active are an antidote to loneliness. This

conclusion is found in a number of other studies based on

activity theory (e.g., Elwell and Maltbie-Crannel, 1981;

Liang, 1982) in which leisure activity is modeled as an

intervening variable between an individual and life

satisfaction. Johnson and Riker (1981) concluded that

leisure interests are constricted when life satisfaction is

low.

Leisure activity also has been found to promote

development of life coping skills, to decrease stress, and








20

to increase a sense of enjoyment within older adults (Adams,

1980). In order to enhance quality of life, Tedrick (1984)

integrated older adults into recreational activities with

younger age groups. The benefits found in this approach

were a decrease in stereotypical thinking about the effects

of aging and the learning of a more holistic view of life.

Art therapy and poetry groups have helped older adults to

gain life satisfaction. Capuzzi and Gross (1980) described

an increase in life satisfaction from participation in music

groups (sing-along, listening, or instrumental). These

authors cited studies which report increased body movement,

positive change in withdrawn older adults, benefit from

opportunities to reminisce, and increased feelings of

closeness to others.

The same authors demonstrated that satisfaction with

life increased with participation in groups which focused on

exploring group members' individual concerns and also in

other kinds of educational groups which focused on topic

discussions or helping older adults organize their ideas.

Older adults who experienced health anxieties reacted

positively to topic group work procedures which focused on

helping participants to relax while gaining information

about topics of interest. It has been found that the chance

to gain information in interaction with others is a subset

of the human need for group affiliation (Shacter, 1959).

Therefore, topic discussions appear to be effective leisure

activities which clarify issues and reduce anxiety.








21

Activity is the most prominent variable in relation to

the sense that older adults control their own lives. High

activity level, a broader category than leisure, implies the

potential for effective control and suggests energy levels

and mobility consistent with personal effectiveness.

Research on locus of control for all age groups suggests

that a sense of personal control is important for the

activity-life satisfaction linkage (Ziegler and Reid, 1983).

Keith (1978) tested the hypothesis that changes in

older adults' lives would lead to lack of involvement in

leisure activities and might precipitate a social breakdown

syndrome among older adults. The syndrome was described as

one in which persons eventually accepted a label as

incompetent and defined themselves as sick or inadequate.

The author asserted that increased leisure participation

might intervene in the cycle and correlate with the

reconstruction of a satisfying self-image. Data were

collected and analyzed from interviews with 214 males and

354 females, aged 72+. Results indicated that life changes

did not seem to trigger withdrawal from most leisure

activities; that leisure involvement and satisfaction were

(somewhat) gender-linked; and that participation

differentially satisfied the needs of men and women.

Mellinger and Holt (1982) compared 145 participants

(aged 57-92) in three types of programs for older adults on

leisure activities, attitudes toward leisure, social

contacts, morale, and demographic variables. Results of










discriminant function analysis indicated that older adults

in the Retired Senior Volunteer Programs (RSVP), recreation

programs, and nutrition programs differed in significant

ways in regard to activity levels, socioeconomic statuses,

and morale. The RSVP volunteers were highly active,

service-oriented individuals. Their activities gave them

satisfaction because they offered a chance to be of service

to others. Recreation group members were sociable, fairly

active people, with stable living arrangements, who enjoyed

the change of pace of social gatherings. Nutrition group

members experienced more sensory-motor problems and appeared

to have somewhat lower morale and lower socioeconomic

status. They appeared satisfied to interact with the

sponsoring organization mainly to satisfy the need to eat.

In a study of satisfaction and leisure activity, 18

modes of social participation through leisure activities

were tested. One thousand six hundred and forty-nine older

adults responded to 27 paragraphs defining satisfaction

within leisure activities using the Paragraphs About

Leisure-Form E (PAL-E). The eight satisfiers indicated were

self-expression, companionship, power, compensation,

security, service, intellectual aestheticism, and solitude

(Tinsley, 1982).

Three distinctly different research technologies have

been associated with the measurement of leisure preferences

and life satisfaction. The earliest research relied on

judges' ratings concerning in what fashion and to what










extent an older adult was willing and/or able to engage in

leisure. The second generation of research focused more

precisely on empirical indicators of the leisure process,

measuring what the older adult could and did do. The most

recent developments emphasize measures of leisure

preferences as related to need satisfiers (Graney, 1982). A

general conclusion concerning leisure and life satisfaction

is that leisure is valuable to an older adult in as much as

it helps him or her fulfill aspirations. A person who is

satisfied finds that life activities are congruent with his

or her values. Leisure leads to happiness when it helps a

person maintain positive feelings in excess of negative

feelings. Leisure relates to "satisfaction" in that it

leads to the fulfillment of needs, expectations, wishes, or

desires (George and Bearon, 1980).


Research on Older Adult Leisure


A large body of literature has been developed relating

leisure to a variety of adaptive behaviors. Atchley (1980)

indicated that "aging or changes associated with it cause

activity patterns to change, if not in the type of activity,

at least in the amount of activity" (p. 189). Leisure as an

adaptation in later years has been studied as a function of

1) gender, 2) environment, 3) options available, 4) habit,

and 5) reward values.










Leisure as a Function of Sex Difference

Kando (1980) summarized his findings with the

statement, "Men dominate nearly all areas of leisure and

recreation" (p. 69). Payne and Whittington examined several

stereotypes about the older woman as "a pleasantly plump

granny who spends her time in a rocking chair knitting or

sewing" (1980, p. 17). These authors claimed that the group

with the most free time is women over the age of 60, and

they stated that there were few studies supporting gender

differences in the use of leisure time. Atchley (1980)

found that, for both genders, reading and watching

television were the most common participation activities,

followed by talking and visiting. Older males (in rural

retirement) expressed interests in passive activities that

had some form of tangible return or product such as fishing,

hunting, and investment. These individuals had few

interests in vigorous, physical activities, the classical

arts, or international affairs. Individuals surveyed in the

Booz-Allen and Hamilton Co., Inc. (1981) study were seen as

(somewhat) dormant, needing and wanting family contact and

support. A conclusion which can be be drawn is that

cultural/social norms tend to regulate leisure preferences:


More important than similarities and differences in
the kinds of activities engaged in by men and women
are the processes underlying the differences. From
childhood on, some kinds of activities are defined
as acceptable for one sex rather than the other.
(Kelly, 1982, p. 225)










Leisure as a Function of Environment

Romsa and Bondy (1983) studied older adults in the city

of Windsor, Canada, to test the hypothesis that retired

persons with the fewest housing constraints would exhibit

more active leisure behavior patterns. Their results

indicated that both location and dwelling type appeared to

be related to quality of retirement leisure activity.

Residents of privately operated apartments were found to be

most active while respondents from public housing units were

least active.

To determine whether musical activity preferences were

related to residence or community size, Gilbert and Beal

(1982) surveyed such preferences in relation to environment.

They found that older adults (on the average) had definite

music preferences, and that listening and observation of

music for enjoyment were more common to sedentary older

adults than they were to active ones.

One hundred and twenty-five older adults, between the

ages of 45 and 93, were interviewed regarding how their

environments enhance or constrain their leisure.

Constraints identified by the younger respondents included

lack of time, lack of money, and bad weather. Constraints of

the older respondents included lack of companions, fear of

crime, lack of transportation, and fear for health (McGuire,

1982).

Beland (1982) described the State of Florida as a

leisure environment, which by virtue of climate and








26

reputation, enhances anticipation in older adults. In this

sense, Florida is ecologically conducive to the development

of leisure preferences. Initially, its format leads to

relocation behaviors and then to "pervasive expectations

about leisure that older adults typically bring with them to

this state" (p.16). Swaim (1983) indicated that there is

value in understanding the scope of older adults' leisure

interests in relation to environmental pressures.


Leisure as a Function of Options Available

What individuals do during their leisure time has been

shown to relate to what is provided. Planners of leisure

services therefore play a direct role in determining what

people do during their leisure time (Morgan and Godbey,

1978). In a study on the institutional policies of

sheltered-care facilities, the Policy and Program

Information Form (POLIF) was used to measure 10 conceptually

unified dimensions (Lemke and Moos, 1980). The development

of the POLIF was based on normative data from 93

representative facilities, and it was found useful in

profiling and comparing the scope of adult care facilities.

The authors concluded that facilities offering intensive

care did not offer much choice of activity or encourage

older adults to structure their own daily routine.

Myers (1983a) illustrated that older adults in nursing

homes accepted leisure activities without expression of

frustration or assertion of unmet needs. Lemke and Moos








27

(1980) indicated that larger facilities tended to screen out

the most severe cases and offer more health services and

social activities. These latter facilities had formal

procedures for transmitting expectations and involving

residents in decision making regarding daily routine and

leisure activities.


Leisure as a Function of Habit

Hill (1981), in discussing the cognitive processes

involved in personal preference, defined the concept of

"style" as a form of expressive behavior which manifests

itself in consistent and predictable patterns. In a study

of the stylistic qualities of older adult activity

preferences, Petrakis and Hanson (1981) found that whether

older adults chose passive or active kinds of leisure

depended on whether the leisure activity selected followed

traditional patterns of leisure activity which evolved from

lifelong socializing experiences. Lawton (1978) indicated

that older adults' leisure preferences were determined by

the social values prevalent in their earlier years, their

habits, biologically and socially determined competencies,

evolving personal needs, and the external environment's

impinging and facilitating influences.

An example of the influence of socialization on leisure

preference is found in a survey of older adults who chose

reading as a leisure activity (Ribovich and Erikson, 1980).

Analysis revealed that reading was and historically had been










an important aspect of their lives. The behaviors of

purchasing and borrowing books had become habits earlier in

life. In this example, leisure preferences for reading

evolved out of habit and continued opportunity to read.


Leisure as a Function of Reward Values

The reward values of leisure are important aspects of

leisure preference. Many older adults like to shop, and

Faludi (1984) found that the chance to be assertive in

bargaining with store personnel when shopping seemed to be a

reinforcer of self-esteem.

A random sampling of older adult residents of Pulaski

County, Arkansas, was conducted to study learning as a

positive, rewarding leisure activity. Telephone surveys

were completed for 346 individuals. Findings showed that

almost 85% of the respondents indicated a leisure interest

in education. Two-thirds of the respondents were women, 62%

were married, the majority were white (82%), more than 58%

had incomes ranging between $5,000 and $30,000, and 26% were

currently or recently involved in an educational program.

The most common reward perceived was in learning new things

for personal growth. Over 34% of the respondents expressed

interest in teaching others (Graham et al., 1982).

This portion of the review of the literature emphasizes

that there are few studies which set up a theoretical

hypothesis in which leisure preferences are measured in

terms of an overall theory. Bull (1982) states that











To the extent that theory about the leisure
behavior of older adults has been developed,
it has stressed the relationships between
constructs (e.g., activity and morale) and
ignored the relationships between the
empirical indicators and theoretical
constructs of leisure. (p. 483)


Preference still needs to be treated as a predictor

variable which takes into account the diversity of older

adult lifestyles. The functions of lifestyle and demographic

variables also still need to be set into a predictable

pattern of correspondence in a leisure theory, supported by

valid, representative data on older adults.


Studies on Leisure Choice Determinants


Everyday, older adults sample various formal, informal,

and solitary leisure activities in the hope of finding

something to do which will be rewarding and meaningful

(Lemon, Bengston, and Peterson, 1972); but how does it

happen that they decide on one activity as having potential

for satisfaction? Adler (1965) asserts that how a person

evaluates a given environment depends upon the person's

relationship to that environment. Kelly (1982) discusses

the notion that the subjective reaction of an older adult to

a given leisure activity must be taken into account in order

to predict accurately whether an individual will engage in

that activity. Metropoulous (1980) provides evidence that

strong personal and environmental factors interact and








30

determine whether older adults will positively or negatively

value a leisure activity.

A conclusion drawn from a series of articles reviewed

by Dunn (1981) is that older adults will probably be willing

to participate in leisure which they believe they will

handle successfully. He cited such factors as shifting work

arrangements, family structures, women's roles, and

immigration as environmental factors which influence whether

an older adult views leisure optimistically and

enthusiastically. The health, personality, meaningful

relationships, and socioeconomic status of older adults are

a small scale social system which make up the environmental,

predisposing factors inherent in leisure choices (Butler,

1984). In making leisure choices, older adults interact with

external, concrete things and adapt to geography, weather,

and price and to all those physical conditions which in some

way reinforce or extinguish participatory behavior.


A Paradigm for Leisure Preference


A model for consideration of leisure preference as a

function of both personal and environmental factors is the

field theory of Kurt Lewin (1951). Lewin (1951) indicated

that people and their environment are parts of a dynamic

field, or gestalt. The influence of environment on leisure

preference does not limit the influence of personality;

rather, it adds a dimension to choice which has as much

importance as personality. "Only by the concrete whole








31

which comprises the object and the situation are the vectors

which determine the dynamics of the event defined" (Lewin,

1935, p 30).

The basic statements of field theory are that: (a)

behavior has to be derived from a totality of existing

facts; and (b) these coexisting facts have a character of a

dynamic field in so far as the state of any part of this

field depends on every other part of the field. Lewin terms

this dynamic field "life space," which includes the person

and the psychosocial environment of the person. He stated

"in principle it is everywhere accepted that behavior (B) is

a function of the person (P) and the environment (E), B =

f(P,E), and that (P) and (E), in this formula are

interdependent variables" (p. 25). Using this life-space

model, leisure preference can be studied as a personal,

adaptive set of behaviors of definite character, chosen

freely by an individual, within the limits of their life

space.

In this study, the life space of an individual is

pictured in the context of income, health status, work

history, educational level, and marital status. This model

of older adult leisure preference is an "ecologically

oriented model that assesses human environments more

directly and that seeks to understand environmental

structures in terms of their own unique features" (Wicker,

1981, p. 24).








32

Which leisure preferences the older adult expresses are

hypothesized as evolving out of an ecologically based

predisposition. For example, Goodnow (1980) suggested that

an excellent way to assess the desires of older adults for

social, recreational, and educational services is to segment

older adult groups into distinct lifestyle groupings. She

stated that the needs and interests of various segments

differ significantly because of different environmentally

conditioned motivational orientations.

Focusing on environment allows for the fact that more

than personal style is involved in leisure preference.

Leisure preference occurs within a kind of "behavioral

setting" whose determinants include both people and

inanimate objects, and within whose time and space these

various determinants interact (Wicker, 1981). Preference is

not accidental and is always ecological (Barker, 1968).

Preference statements are motivated, goal-directed, and

occur within the context of some definable environment. For

example, when a city places a park bench in a pleasant

location some individuals reciprocate by sitting on it.

Without the opportunity, the preference may not have

surfaced.

In order to simulate "opportunities" for leisure, a

checklist of leisure can be used to assess whether an older

adult has an attraction to a given activity. A well done

taxonomy makes it possible to consider leisure/person

information at different levels of generalization because it










ranges from broad to highly specific groupings of leisure

activity. Used as a checklist, a leisure taxonomy serves as

an analog of actual leisure alternatives. It is a bridge

between the state of one system (i.e., the person) relative

to the state of a surrounding system (i.e., the leisure

environment). Overs, O'Connor, and DeMarco (1974) and

Overs, Taylor, and Adkins (1977) present categories of and

individual leisure activities in a taxonomy of leisure

alternatives. Although not empirically based, this

classification system is the most comprehensive taxonomy

appearing in the literature. Some evidence of the validity

and usefulness of the taxonomy was developed by Tinsley,

Teaff, Colbs, and Kaufman (1985).


Summary


In this review of recent research on leisure behavior,

it becomes clear that there are few studies which set up a

theoretical hypothesis in which leisure preference or

personal evaluations are measured in terms of an overall

theory. In the (mostly) correlational studies reviewed, it

appears that leisure preference behavior frequently

correlates with aspects of lifestyle which are defined in

this study as work history, income, education, household

type, and health. The personal values, social norms,

environmental pressures, availability of leisure activity,

and life history of older adults are assumed to be balanced

and integrated in lifestyle factors. Demographic factors










which are uncontrollable by the individual older adult

(i.e., race, gender, and age) appear to have a less direct

influence on leisure preference.

This research is an effort to set lifestyle and

demographic factors into a predictable pattern of

correspondence with the environmental characteristics of

Overs' et al. (1974, 1977) taxonomy of leisure activities.

Since leisure preferences include an individual's personal

projection of which leisure environments offer the best

prospect for pleasure, the use of Overs' materials as a type

of environmental simulator is a way to assess many of the

trends and theories about what older adults like to do.
















CHAPTER III
METHODOLOGY


Since older adults differ from one another in many ways

and to remarkable extents, the purpose of this study was to

determine a pattern in the leisure activity preferences of

older adults in selected environments. It followed that in

order to understand older adult leisure preferences, it was

necessary to observe and analyze specific sets of

preferences as they interacted with specified sets of

environmental conditions.

This chapter first describes a microcomputer-based

design for collecting older adult leisure preference data.

The second section then explains the instrumentation and

procedures used to collect leisure preference data from

selected older adult samples. The chapter ends with a

discussion of the limitations of the design.


Hypotheses


In the absence of an explicit theoretical hypothesis

concerning the leisure preferences of older adults, the

following hypotheses about the relationships among older

adult preferences and older adult lifestyles were designed

to test the "best fit" of relationships in the observed










data. The null hypotheses tested in this study were as

follows:


1. Ho: The leisure preferences of older adults are not

correlated to the gender, age, and race of older adults.


2. Ho: The leisure preferences of older adults are not

correlated to the lifestyle factors of education level, work

history, self-reported income, self-reported health status,

and household type of older adults.


Procedures


This causal comparative study hypothesized that

lifestyle and demographics do not significantly (p = <.05)

associate with patterns of older adults' leisure

preferences. In order to test these hypotheses,

observations of preference were made by relating preferences

to older adult lifestyle and demographic factors.

A sample of older adults was invited to review Overs,

Taylor, and Adkins' (1977) Avocational Activities Inventory

(AAI). An explanation was given that a review of leisure

options might trigger ideas about activities that they might

enjoy, or alert them to activities that they may not have

considered. As further encouragement, older adults were

offered a printed record of their leisure preferences among

those listed in the AAI. The microcomputer version of the

AAI was offered to subjects as an "easy path" to the many

hundreds of AAI leisure activity listings.










Each older adult who elected to participate then

personally viewed and interacted with a microcomputer-based

exposition of the AAI. Each AAI leisure activity chosen

served as a variable label used for measuring the intensity

and direction of leisure preference. Each participant's

age, gender, race, marital status, work history,

self-reported health status, income, and educational level

were also recorded for use as predictor variables.

After the data were collected, the AAI leisure

preferences of older adults were "scored" as described

below. Subject responses to AAI items were tallied on three

levels of specificity General, Intermediate, and Specific.

This was done by adding together the responses to Specific

items (e.g, Flower Gardening, Vegetable Gardening) in order

to "score" preferences at an Intermediate level (e.g.

Gardening) (See Fig. 1.). Intermediate scores were summed

to "score" General level preferences (e.g., Nature). This

was done for approximately 565 Specific, 72 Intermediate,

and 28 General categories of leisure activity.











General Level Activities: e.g., Nature Activities
/A
/ \
/ \


Intermediate Level Activities:


Specific Level Activities:

Figure 1
Hierarchical Structure of Data


e.g., Gardening







e.g., Flower Gardening
e.g., Flower Gardening


Table 1
Description and Ranae of


Predictor Variables


Demographic Labels

Age
Self-Reported Income
Gender
Work History Code
Race
Self-Report of Health
Household Type

Education


Range


60 and above
Sufficient/Not-sufficient
Male, Female
Data, People, Things, Ideas
White, Black, Other
Restricting/Not-restricting
Living with Spouse, Alone, in
Group Quarters, or with Relatives
Elementary, High School,
College










Table 2
Component Activity Totals in Leisure Hierarchy for Each
Level


General Intermediate Specific

1. Games 9 45
2. Sports 9 66
3. Nature 9 79
4. Crafts 9 71
5. Art and Music 9 77
6. Collecting 9 72
7. Educat./Entertain./Culture 9 80
8. Organizational 9 75
9. METs 5 Exertion 17 137
10. METs 4 Exertion 27 204
11. METs 3 Exertion 37 296
12. METs 2 Exertion 47 364
13. 'METs 1 Exertion 33 274
14. Aesthetic 61 624
15. Utilitarian 25 210
16. Creative 33 258
17. Pre-Patterned 52 390
18. Abstract 21 265
19. Concrete 55 434
20. Group Effort 33 257
21. Individual Effort 60 463
22. Structured 43 304
23. Unstructured 32 264
24. Supervised 31 246
25. Unsupervised 43 345
26. Recognition 52 404
27. Indoor 57 453
28. Outdoor 38 303


Note. See Appendix A for the names of Intermediate and
Specific leisure activities attributed to each General group
of leisure activities (from Overs et al., 1977, 1974).








40

After data were collected, all three score levels were

analyzed in order to determine any significant associations

between predictor variables (i.e., the demographic

variables) and dependent variables (i.e., the General,

Intermediate, and Specific leisure categories).


Instrumentation


The device used to collect data in this study was Tandy

Corporation's (Fort Worth, Texas) Model 3 microcomputer.

The microcomputer was programmed to display leisure activity

descriptions and to record preferences for the 565 specific

items in the AAI taxonomy of leisure activities.

Patterned after the Dictionary of Occupational Titles

(U.S. Department of Labor Emplyment and Traikning Division,

1977), the AAI is not an assessment device itself, but it is

used as a systematic grouping of leisure activities. The

AAI is a result of a 1974 research and demonstration grant

(15-P-5521/5-03) from the Social and Rehabilitation Service,

Department of Health and Human Services, Washington D.C.

The AAI divides leisure activities into nine areas which

associate with separate activities and/or physical settings:

games, sports, nature, collecting, crafts, art and music,

educational/entertainment/culture, volunteering, and

organizational activities. Overs, Taylor, and Adkins

published a "final" version of the AAI in 1977. AAI's "800"

category (Volunteer Activities) was dropped from use in this

study because as a separate category it included too many

unrealistic options; e.g., processing metal ores and motor










freight. It was merged with the Organizational activity,

"900" category. The entire text of the modified version of

the AAI appears in Appendix A.

Intermediate levels of the AAI activity groups were

created by modifying the AAI list of activities; e.g.,

"Active Games" was changed to "PLAYING Active Games."

Syllable length was kept short to make reading easier, and

1/4" typeface was used to form the letters on each

microcomputer screen.

Programmed with the AAI as a (leisure activities)

database, the microcomputer enabled older adults to decide

what they liked or disliked among a panorama of leisure

activity alternatives. When the older adult chose a leisure

category to investigate, the microcomputer displayed more

information on that category. Thus, by interacting with the

microcomputer presentation, the adult directed a

comprehensive leisure preference selection process.

This interactive search provided each participant a

view of each leisure category for as long as necessary for

comprehension and comfort. Each participant personally

determined the rate at which the categories changed. If the

adult wanted to review or reconsider a leisure category,

they simply touched one key. An older adult was therefore

able to change a response or skip areas of disinterest by

simply touching a key. The farther older adults wanted to

search into any leisure category, the longer the review took

to complete. It took these older adults about 30 minutes on










the average to complete the activity, and the longest time

was about 40 minutes. The shortest time was about five

minutes.

The possible need for extra assistance was satisfied by

employing aides to facilitate the exposition and data

collection functions of the microcomputer. The aide helped

the older adult feel at ease with a possible first exposure

to microcomputer technology. For older adults who wanted to

complete the survey, but also wanted to avoid the use of the

computer, the aide entered the data for them. In these

cases the aide read information off the screen, as needed,

for the older adult to understand the screen display. This

help did not bias the data because aides were instructed not

to add extemporaneously to the displays, to offer

encouragement for some activity choices as opposed to

others, or to express opinions about the project.

The microcomputer data collection model enhanced the

random, non-intended occurrence of positive responses

because participants had three chances to say no to a

category and only one chance to say yes. Using this data

collection paradigm, the number of positive responses was

tallied by recording only responses to specific (i.e.,

Specific level) AAI activity list items; and participants

accessed these items only after passing, by positive

responding, two (i.e., General and Intermediate) "bail out"

levels which contained synopses of what could be expected on

the Specific level of activities from the AAI leisure list.










Each General level activity which appeared on the

microcomputer's screen included an approximately 50 word

synopsis of that group of leisure activities.

For example, if participants wanted to express an

interest in "Games," they could only do this preference on

the Specific level. Participants developed scores by first

selecting "Games" (General level), then "Target Games"

(Intermediate level), and then on a Specific level (dart

games, horseshoes, etc.). Only the responses to Specific

level items were tallied.


Subjects


Three hundred and three older adults were sampled

across a representative spectrum of individuals 60 years old

and older who were residents of the Orlando Statistical

Management Survey Area (SMSA) in Florida. In order to

develop a large, representative sample of older adults,

subjects were selected from typical older adult life

situations. Each subgroup was large enough to isolate

differences in that group's pattern of chosen AAI leisure

preferences from the sample taken as a whole. The basis of

inferences about a given subgroup's preferences depended on

the magnitude or intensity of that subgroup's preference

statements. To the extent that members of a given

demographic or lifestyle group significantly differed from

subjects who did not populate that given group, this was










taken as evidence of preference associated with a given

lifestyle or demographic statistic.

This research was conducted exclusively in the Orlando,

FL, SMSA. Non-responders were those individuals who were

invited, but who did not participate. Their decisions could

have been a result of beliefs that they did not want or need

any review or clarification of leisure options. They also

might have felt that leisure was not a significant or an

attractive enough topic on which to spend their time. There

were no systematic reasons for exclusion of any potential

older adult who wished to participate. Some were met in

activities centers funded by the Older Americans Act (as

amended in 1978) and others were from non-government

sponsored centers of older adult activity; e.g., shopping

malls, private housing areas, "Retirement Expo." Table 3

indicates the number of subjects obtained in the data

collection process during which various groups of older

adults participated in the study. The list includes the

reason why the older adults had gathered and the attraction

which drew them. Each entry on the list indicates

approximately an eight-hour daytime period during which

older adults had the opportunity to participate.










Table 3
Sites Where Subjects Were Surveyed


# Sbj. Attraction


Site


Health Fair
Health Fair
Health Fair
Health Fair
Health Fair
Health Fair
Congregate Meals
Congregate Meals
Congregate Meals
Varied Activity
Luncheon
Education
Varied Activity
Varied Activity
Congregate Meals
Congregate Meals
Recreation
Senior Expo
Senior Expo
Senior Expo
Retirement Expo
Retirement Expo
Retirement Expo
Recreation
Recreation
Congregate Care
Congregate Care
Congregate Care
Congregate Care
Congregate Care
Congregate Care
Recreation
Recreation
Recreation
Employment
Employment
Social
Social


Mall
Hospital
Mall
Civic Center
Civic Center
Civic Center
Senior Center
Senior Center
Senior Center
Senior Center
Civic Center
Mall
Senior Center
Senior Center
Senior Center
Senior Center
Jewish Center
Expo Center
Expo Center
Expo Center
Civic Center
Civic Center
Civic Center
Jewish Center
Jewish Center
Cent Park Ldg.
Cent Park Ldg.
Cent Park Ldg.
Cent Park Ldg.
Howell Place
Howell Place
Public Housing
Public Housing
Public Housing
Job Service
Job Service
Private Home
Private Home


Health Screenings
Health Screenings
Health Screenings
Health Screenings
Health Screenings
Health Screenings
Nourishment
Nourishment
Nourishment
Socializing
Lunch and Activity
Education Fair
Socializing
Socializing
Nourishment
Nourishment
Socializing
Exhibits
Exhibits
Exhibits
Retirement Info.
Retirement Info.
Retirement Info.
Socializing
Socializing
Retirement Living
Retirement Living
Retirement Living
Retirement Living
Retirement Living
Retirement Living
Recreation
Recreation
Recreation
Job Seeking
Job Seeking
Socializing
Socializing


Reason










Sample Characteristics Necessary for Representativeness


The sample was intended to be a stratified,

representative sample of the Orlando, FL, SMSA older adult

community. Orlando is highly similar to older adult

population concentrations throughout the U.S. (East Central

Florida Regional Planning Council, 1983; U.S. Department of

Commerce, Bureau of Census, 1983). The 1980 U.S. Census for

Orlando for age, gender, and race of older adults was used

to establish the proportions necessary for a representative

sample. For example, if the Census indicated that half of

the population of 60 64 year old adults was male and

white, then an attempt was made to obtain 50% of the sample

who were white males.

Based on formulae presented in Meister (1985), the

number of subjects required to produce a confidence level of

5% within the parameters of the General level variables in

this study is approximately 152 subjects; however, in order

to obtain enough subjects who were black in the sample, over

300 subjects were interviewed.


Data Collection Procedures


Data were collected at each site as follows:

Step 1: A variety of older adult oriented organizations in

the Orlando, FL, SMSA were asked to assist in obtaining

subjects in this study. Community center or other

organizational managers were contacted by phone to arrange










for an appointment to discuss using the leisure survey at

their site. Site administrators were asked to introduce the

researcher and to play a facilitating role in his

explanation of the study to the older adults at the site.

The explanation covered the following points:

1. There are a variety of leisure alternatives for older

adults.

2. Enjoyment of leisure starts with selecting an activity

which makes personal sense, and then trying it out.

3. Participation in this survey is a good idea because of

the ease and innovation of using a microcomputer to

select personal leisure preferences.

4. Participation will result in obtaining a personalized,

printed list of leisure choices.

5. No names or other personally identifying information

would be stored in any format that would threaten the

anonymity of those who chose to participate.

Step 2: At the expositions (e.g., Altamonte Mall, Orlando

Expo Center, and Orange County Civic Center) posters

highlighted a booth containing the microcomputer equipment.

Subjects were invited to participate as they passed the

booth. The researcher explained the study and the benefits

of leisure exploration to those who chose to stop and find

out more.

Step 3: The date(s) for the survey was (were) announced to

the group. Site administrators were encouraged to

facilitate their group's awareness of the activity. Any

older adult was offered an opportunity to participate.








48

Step 4: On the day(s) of the survey, a comfortable location

or booth was set up with six chairs, a 10 foot long folding

table, one to three microcomputer terminals, and a printer.

The location was staffed by the researcher who functioned as

an aide or by aides (only) when the researcher was absent.

Aides were compensated at a rate of four dollars per hour.

Step 5: After introduction to the equipment, the staff at

each site keyed in data in the participants' records about

the demographics of each participant; e.g., income, marital

status, gender, age, educational level, site location, case

number, perceived health status, and work history code.

Step 6: Although the staff was ready to assist the

participant at any point in the process, the instructions

shown in Table 4 appeared at the bottom of each screen in

order to give a written reminder to the participant about

how to operate the keyboard.


Table 4
Symbols and Explanations Printed on Computer Screen


Symbol Explanation

"X" To pass over all the leisure
activities on the screen
right arrow To select an activity preference
down arrow To skip a specific leisure activity
"@" To make a change in a selection


These steps were followed carefully in order to improve

the comparability of responses across older adult subjects

in this study. These steps were designed to accommodate

both those subjects who may have had a need for considerable










encouragement and help to complete their answers and those

others who would be able and prefer to work on their own.

Standardization of helping interventions also was intended

to limit the potential biasing impact of the help given.

Training of Aides: Aides for this study were present or

former paraprofessional staff members of Seminole Community

College's Employability Evaluation Unit. Because these

individuals have had experience as psychometrists, training

only involved familiarization with the equipment and

procedures unique to this study. Rimmer and Myers' (1982)

article on testing older adults was given to each aide in

order for each to develop increased sensitivity to the

special characteristics of older adults. A copy of the

World of Work Map (Prediger, 1981) also was given and

explained to the aides for use in coding work history into

data, people, things, and ideas categories. An orientation

to the administration and coding procedures provided an

informal question and answer training format.


Data Analyses


Overs et al. (1974, 1977) served as a uniform, content

valid paradigm for frequency counting of preferences

(dependent variables) in relation to group membership

(independent or predictor variables). The dependent

variables were scored by tallying the number of positive

responses of older adults who populated the various

predictor variable groupings (i.e., self-reported adequacy










of income, gender, age, educational level, self-reported

health status, work history code, race, and household type).

Because there are 565 individual activities listed in

the AAI, the analyses of data were hierarchical.

Step 1: All the General and Intermediate scores were

analyzed in order to calculate the mean, median, mode,

standard deviation, skewness, and kurtosis for each.

Step 2: The higher level in the hierarchies was analyzed

first by cluster analyzing the dependent variables in

reference to individual predictor variables; e.g., games,

sports,..., utilitarian activities, prepatterned activities.

in reference to membership in the adequate income group.

Step 3: The objective of this step was to find the most

tightly packed clusters of activity variables; further, a

procedure was set up to eliminate those variables which were

tightly packed for the poles of each dependent variable.

For example, the poles for the income predictor variable

were self-reported adequate income and self-reported

inadequate income. The activity clusters associated with

both poles of the income variable were compared. Activities

which were tightly associated with both poles were

eliminated from further analysis against income; however,

activities which were tightly packed with one polar

dimension of a predictor variable were kept for further

analysis.










Step 4: The remaining high level activity variables were

entered into a stepwise discriminant analysis in order to

determine the "better than chance" predictor-dependent

variable relationships in this study. In order to avoid a

possible overestimation of the predictive strength of the

groupings in the study, the following formula was used to

determine the number of subjects needed to develop an

unbiased discriminant function S = 50 + 10(x + c 1),

where x is the number of variables used, and c is the number

of predictor groupings (Reiss, 1984). Through use of this

formula, it was found that the sample of 300 older adults

(which also was necessary in order to have enough subjects

in various subgroupings) was adequate for the number of

activity variables established in Step 2.

Step 5: The demographic predictor variables which remained

as significant predictors (p = <.05), based on Step 4

results, were defined in terms of their Intermediate

dependent variables. Next, these significant Intermediate

scores were studied using the Levene W test (Brown and

Forsythe, 1974) because it is not greatly affected by

abnormally distributed group means. For example, male

Intermediate preference scores found to be significant in

Step 4 were compared to female Intermediate preference

scores. Intermediate scores which significantly separated

the dimensions of a predictor variable were retained for

further analysis.

Step 6: The Intermediate activities remaining after Step 5

were then defined into their Specific components. For







52

example, the Gardening Intermediate became Flower Gardening

or Vegetable Gardening. These Specific preference scores

were compared for each dimension for each significant

predictor variable using the chi-square statistic. The

remaining significant (p = <.05) group discriminators became

the final results of this study.


Limitations


Because each individual's preferences are unique, only

a partial explanation of older adult leisure preference is

available by associating group status with leisure

preferences. The actual, personal meaning of leisure for a

person is more intricate than any classification system.

The precision of the leisure questioning on the

microcomputer is therefore limited because it represents

only a sample of all the possible questions that could be

asked, and because variation in response may occur for

reasons unrelated to the characteristics of the AAI itself.

Although it is appropriate to classify older adults as

a group on the basis of the physical or interpersonal

environmental facets of their leisure preferences, older

adults live in their own personal world, which may in some

ways be different from the world of others, even when

environmental circumstances seem to be identical (Elmore and

Roberge, 1982). The statistical model used to explain

anything limits the meaning of the explanation. The

precision of this leisure classification represents only one









way that leisure can be presented. Causal comparative,

cross-sectional studies, like this one, do not capture the

dynamics of change. They cannot completely resolve issues

of causality without experimental, follow-up research.

Although many variables were studied by use of the

clustering, stepwise discriminant analysis, and chi-square

statistics, there were not enough subjects in this study to

allow for the study of any interaction effects which might

exist among lifestyle variables and older adult leisure

preferences. This limits the specificity of the conclusions

which can be drawn. For example, the chi-square analyses

performed on Specific level data indicated that blacks

preferred to collect books more than did whites; however,

although this appears to be a virtually uninterpretable

phenomenon, when it is noted that several black female

subjects were teachers, the interaction of occupation, race,

and preference defines the meaning of the data more clearly.

Finally, since the "domains of interest activities are

as a rule well understood by people in general" (Kuder,

1977, p. 16), an assumption was made that Overs' et al.

(1977) AAI represents a listing of well understood leisure

activities. It was further assumed that bringing together

microcomputers, older adults, and the AAI resulted in an

easy, yet comprehensive experience in which older adults







54

meaningfully expressed their leisure preferences. Those

older adults who did not participate were a source of bias

in the data collected because they removed a perspective on

leisure common to an entire group who share an aversion to

participation and/or the use of computers.















CHAPTER IV
RESULTS


The transformations performed on the data from this

study are described first in this chapter. Next, the actual

versus the ideal breakdown of the sample is detailed by

demographic characteristics. Statistics concerning the

distributive characteristics of the General and Intermediate

level dependent variables are then presented. The results

of the cluster analyses of the 28 General level dependent

variables also are presented separately for each of the

predictor variables in this study. Third, the stepwise

discriminant analyses of General level leisure clusters are

presented for each predictor variable in this study.

Fourth, the procedure used to break down the significantly

discriminating (p = <.05) General dependent variables into

their Intermediate components is explained. Fifth, the

results of a series of Levene W tests of the significance of

Intermediate components of significant General level

dependent variables are presented. Finally, the results of

the chi-square analyses of the discrete Specific dependent

variable components of the Intermediate level dependent

variables are presented in relation to demographic (i.e.,

predictor) variable subgrouplngs.










Data Transformations


In order to test the two hypotheses in this study

effectively, the following data transformations were

performed.

Specific, discrete preference responses were summed on

two levels General and Intermediate. The groupings were

determined according to Overs' et al. (1974, 1977) taxonomy

groupings. Since the resulting General dependent variables

are composed of widely varying numbers of Intermediate level

components, transformations were performed to make their

means more readily comparable. Each General dependent

variable was divided by a number equal to its Intermediate

components.


Sample Characteristics


Prior to the testing of the hypotheses, analyses were

conducted to determine whether the data were collected in

accordance with the representative sample of older adults

required for this study. The totals for Age, Race, and

Gender are reported in Table 5. The sample deviates from a

true representative form in all categories. The samples

deviate most in the 70 79 age ranges and least in the 60 -

64 age ranges. There are also discrepancies in all of the

subcategories (i.e., age, race, and gender).

Following the protocol described in the procedures

section, attempts were made to find representative groupings







57

of older adults by contacting diverse centers of older adult

activities; however, as the data collection procedures

progressed, over-coverage and under-coverage of certain

categories resulted. The deviations are small and the

sample does (very closely) approximate a true representative

sample of older adults in the Orlando, FL, SMSA.


Descriptions of General and Intermediate Dependent Variables


Tables 6 and 7 contain statistics describing the

distributive characteristics for General dependent variables

(Table 6) and for Intermediate dependent variables (Table

7). When a distribution is symmetric, the expected values

of the skewness and kurtosis statistics are zero. For both

the General and Intermediate dependent variables in this

study, skewness is higher than can be normally expected.

Also, both General and Intermediate responses tend to be

consistently negative. The low frequency of positive

responding is seen in the kurtosis statistics which are

abnormally high for both General and Intermediate level

responses. The negative tendency in the data is partially

the result of the measurement technique itself, and it is

seen primarily as a statistical disparity which does not

impact on the results of the study because the measurement

model biases all data collection categories in this study.

Since the means of the General variables (Table 6) were

transformed to make them more visually comparable, it is

readily observable that the differences between them are







58

small. The larger standard deviations and range values of

the eight General categories of Games, Sports, Nature,

Collection, Craft, Art and Music, Cultural, and

Organizational are indicative of wider individual variations

among the subjects' preferences for activities in these

categories; further, these same categories were those which

actually appeared on the computer screen during the survey

process. The other variables are summations of patterns

inherent in preferences for these basic eight categories.

The top, or favorite, General categories, defined as

those activities with a 1.3 or greater preference rating,

appear in the following order: Cultural, Nature, Individual,

Mets 1 Exertion, Supervised, and Mets 3 Exertion. On an

Intermediate level (Table 7), these translate into favorite,

defined as ratings above 1.9, activities ordered as

religion, self-development, art and music appreciation,

gardening, reading, miscellaneous cultural, traveling, and

TV watching. On a Specific level, the top 10 favorites were

any type of TV watching, newspaper reading, visiting friends

and relatives, interstate travel, church membership, flower

gardening, photo collecting, baseball watching, swimming,

and church participation.





Table 5
Projected and Actual Number Totals for Sample Representation


Total
Act. Proj.


Age Group
Act. Proj.


Gender
Act. Proj.


Race
Act. Proj.


60 64:





65 69:





300 303 70 74:





75 79:





80 and up:


87 < Male:
87 91

Female:



74 7 3 Male:
Female:

74 73 Male:


Female:
Male:
58 49

Female:


Male:
39 49

Female:


Male:
42 41

Female:


White:
41 40 Black:
Other:
White:
46 51 Black:
Other:
White:
33 36 Black:
Other:
White:
41 37 Black:
Other:
SWhite:
25 23 Black:
Other:
White:
33 26 Black:
Other:
SWhite:
15 19 <-Black:
Other:
White:
24 30 Black:
Other:
White:
14 15 Black:
Other:
White:
28 26 Black:
Other:


Total














Table 6
Mean, Standard Deviation,
General Level Leisure


Ranae. Skewness. and Kurtosis for


Activities


Activities Variable


Standard
Mean Deviation Range Skewness Kurtosis


METs 1
METs 2
METs 3
METs 4
METs 5
Indoor
Outdoor
Games


Exertion
Exertion
Exertion
Exertion
Exertion


Sports
Nature
Collection
Craft
Art and Music
Cultural
Organizational
Abstract
Concrete
Group
Individual
Structured
Unstructured
Supervised
Unsupervised
Recognition
Aesthetic
Utilitarian
Creative
Pre-Patterned


N=303


1.32
1.23
1.31
1.23
1.23
1.29
1.29
1.17
1.11
1.36
1.22
1.09
1.01
1.74
1.06
1.24
1.24
1.21
1.32
1.25
1.17
1.31
1.25
1.19
1.29
1.29
1.26
1.28


0.92
0.80
0.84
0.84
0.95
0.82
0.84
1.18
1.33
1.35
1.24
1.23
1.16
1.74
1.01
0.93
0.78
0.83
0.84
0.81
0.86
0.90
0.85
0.77
0.82
0.89
0.87
0.82


5.12
4.51
4.62
4.07
4.70
4.56
4.55
6.75
6.15
6.05
5.84
6.84
6.00
8.18
5.75
4.90
4.34
4.03
4.55
4.18
4.40
4.45
4.69
4.32
4.44
5.32
4.87
4.42


1.22
0.98
0.98
0.83
1.14
1.09
1.04
1.55
1.66
1.06
1.25
1.71
1.64
1.43
1.62
1.07
1.06
0.97
1.03
1.08
1.08
1.04
1.14
1.09
1.04
1.09
0.90
1.03


1.90
1.16
0.87
0.29
1.04
1.40
0.88
2.96
3.11
0.42
1.26
3.34
2.71
1.63
2.94
1.08
1.33
0.75
1.19
1.23
1.13
0.95
1.67
1.37
1.17
1.51
0.82
1.12













Table 7
Mean, Standard Deviation, Range, Skewness, and Kurtosis for
Intermediate Level Leisure Activities


Standard
Activities Variable Mean Deviation Range Skewness Kurtosis

Active Games 1.63 2.30 9.00 1.63 2.04
Target/Skill Games 1.18 2.07 9.00 2.24 4.57
Table/Board Games 1.08 2.08 9.00 2.26 4.57
Card Games 1.47 2.21 9.00 1.62 2.06
Knowledge/Word Games 1.40 2.17 9.00 1.79 2.58
Puzzle 1.05 1.98 9.00 2.34 5.29
Model Racing Games 1.37 2.28 9.00 1.83 2.39
Computer Games 1.11 1.96 9.00 2.15 4.51
Miscellaneous Games 1.25 2.16 9.00 2.08 3.74
Observe Sport Event 1.42 2.17 9.00 1.56 1.58
Individual Sport 1.27 2.12 9.00 1.92 3.18
Competitive Sport 1.01 1.81 9.00 2.26 5.25
Dual Active Sport 1.36 2.19 9.00 1.65 1.93
Combative Sport 1.25 2.11 9.00 1.87 2.81
Team Participation 1.09 1.89 9.00 2.21 4.87
Racing Sport 1.36 2.15 9.00 1.78 2.65
Special Olympics 1.08 1.85 9.00 1.94 3.36
Miscellaneous Sport 1.12 2.03 9.00 2.21 4.72
View Scenery/Life 1.75 2.42 9.00 1.19 0.15
Exploring/Discovery 1.37 2.11 9.00 1.54 1.54
Gathering Plants 1.30 2.39 9.00 1.92 2.64
Camping 1.91 2.68 9.00 1.32 0.55
Fishing 1.47 2.16 9.00 1.53 1.76
Hunting 1.11 1.93 9.00 1.97 3.47
Gardening 1.97 2.69 9.00 1.16 0.06
Animal Care/Exhibit 1.36 2.10 9.00 1.52 1.36
Miscellaneous Nature 1.15 2.09 9.00 2.13 4.10
Photo Collection 1.72 2.42 9.00 1.33 0.72
Coin Collection 1.33 2.08 9.00 1.66 2.09
Stamp Collection 1.05 1.95 9.00 2.17 4.27
Natural Objects 1.69 2.33 9.00 1.25 0.35
Model Collection 1.33 2.24 9.00 1.79 2.33
Doll Collection 1.10 2.11 9.00 2.06 3.41
Art Objects 1.52 2.39 9.00 1.53 1.22
Antique Collection 1.41 2.31 9.00 1.61 1.44
Misc. Collection 0.89 1.80 9.00 2.26 4.70
Cooking 1.40 2.29 9.00 1.66 1.70
Decorating 1.23 2.06 9.00 1.84 2.67
Weaving/Needlework 1.19 2.19 9.00 1.94 2.88
Toy/Model Building 1.44 2.33 9.00 1.64 1.74
Paper Crafts 1.16 2.05 9.00 1.83 2.57
Leather and Textile 0.99 1.95 9.00 2.27 4.80
Wood/Metal Working 1.22 2.12 9.00 1.87 2.72













Table 7--continued

Handyman 1.08 2.04 9.00 2.10 3.73
Miscellaneous Crafts 0.98 1.91 9.00 2.32 4.99
Photography 1.28 2.20 9.00 1.81 2.50
Drawing 1.36 2.21 9.00 1.65 1.75
Painting 1.04 1.94 9.00 2.18 4.54
Sculpture 1.11 1.95 9.00 1.88 2.79
Dramatics 1.11 1.99 9.00 1.98 3.31
Dance 0.96 1.80 9.00 2.02 3.31
Music 1.13 2.08 9.00 2.09 3.75
Writing 1.09 1.97 9.00 2.16 4.47
Misc. Art and Music 1.00 1.98 9.00 2.25 4.38
Radio Listening 1.74 2.61 9.00 1.45 0.96
Television Watching 1.91 2.82 9.00 1.35 0.47
Entertainment/Plays 1.23 2.18 9.00 1.87 2.63
Reading 1.96 2.70 9.00 1.24 0.32
Art/Music Apprecia. 2.04 2.77 9.00 1.19 0.13
Traveling 1.92 2.67 9.00 1.30 0.46
Religious 2.12 2.67 9.00 1.04 -0.08
Self-development 2.06 2.74 9.00 1.08 -0.17
Misc. Cultural 1.94 2.66 9.00 1.27 0.35
Athletic/Sport Club 1.37 2.28 9.00 1.65 1.72
Hobby Club 1.26 2.23 9.00 1.86 2.69
Political Group 1.20 2.21 9.00 2.09 3.73
Religious Group 1.60 2.56 9.00 1.57 1.41
Cultural Group 1.10 2.22 9.00 2.24 4.23
Social Group 1.22 2.21 9.00 2.02 3.39
Ethnic Organization 1.43 2.47 9.00 1.75 1.97
Volunteer Service 1.36 2.35 9.00 1.79 2.19
Misc. Org./Volunteer 1.22 2.35 9.00 2.05 3.18

N=303











Explanation of the Cluster Analysis of 28 General Leisure
Activities


A cluster analysis of variables was used to measure the

similarity of the 28 General dependent variables.

Similarity was defined as variables for which the patterns

of responses were highly equivalent. The pattern of

response of each General dependent was compared so that

"clusters" of response variance patterns could be formed.

Initially, each cluster had only one variable. At each

successive step, similarly patterned variables were joined

into larger and successively more loosely packed clusters.

The analysis of variables stopped when all 28 variables were

entered. The algorithm for linking variables into clusters

is the calculation of a hierarchical list of variables

ordered from the correlation matrix of the variables. The

first two variables linked are those with highest

correlations. The linkage of these first two results in the

first centering of variance on a given response pattern.

This pattern, used as a centering point in the analysis, is

called the centroid. The linkage of further variables to

this center depends on both the distance and angle of

successive centroids (i.e., centered clusters of

correlations) uncovered in the correlation matrix.









This analysis was completed for the 28 General

dependent variables for each subgroup in the sample. A

cluster pattern was derived for each of the 24 demographic

subgroups used as predictor variables in this study: race

white, race black, gender female, gender male, age (60 -

64), age (65 69), age (70 74), age (75 79), age (80

and up), occupational history in data oriented jobs, occupa-

tional history in things oriented jobs, occupational history

in ideas oriented jobs, and occupational history in people

oriented jobs, no self reported health limitations, self

reported activity inhibiting health limitations, self

reported sufficient income, self reported insufficient

income, living alone, living with spouse, living with

family, living in group quarters, self report of elementary

education, self report of high school education, and self

report of college education.

The tables for the cluster analyses (Tables 8 31)

list the number of variables in each successively discovered

cluster and each numerical representation of the distance

between or similarity of the variables joined in that

cluster. A 0 100 numerical representation of the degree

of similarity of the subgroup response pattern was used.

For example, variables with 0.0 correlation were recorded to

zero (i.e., minimum similarity).

The criterion used to assess which dependent variable

clusters should be analyzed further was as follows:







65

Clusters with approximately 10 or less variables and with a

similarity rating of .95 or greater were considered

tightest, most similarly patterned, and warranting further

analysis. Those tightest and most similarly patterned

dependent variable clusters for each sample subgroup (e.g.,

white subgroup clusters versus black subgroup clusters) were

compared as follows. Those General dependent variables

which clustered tightly and were similarly patterned in

relation to the various subsets of a given demographic

grouping were rejected from further study. This was done in

order to retain only those General dependent variables which

had unique associative patterns within subsets of a given

demographic variable. For example, a variable found in

tight and similar clusters on both the female and male

cluster lists was rejected; however, a variable which

clustered for females only or for males only was retained

for further analysis.

For Tables 8 and 9 (which present the results of the

Gender clustering procedures) the General leisure dependent

variables labeled Indoor, Aesthetic, Individual Effort,

Concrete, Outdoor, and Recognition met the criterion for

tightness and similarity, but they also appeared in both the

male and female clusters; therefore, they were eliminated

from further analysis. The General dependent variables METs

1 Exertion, Structured, Unstructured, Prepatterned, METs 2

Exertion, Unsupervised, and METs 3 Exertion did not appear









in both clusters for Gender and were retained for further

stepwise discriminant analysis.

For Tables 10, 11, and 12 (which present the results of

the cluster analysis of the Education predictor variable

categories of Elementary, High School, and College), the

General dependent variables labeled Recognition,

Unsupervised, Outdoor, Pre-patterned, METs 3 Exertion, METs

2 Exertion, METs 1 Exertion, Structured, and Group Effort

met the criterion for tightness and similarity and did not

appear in all three of the categories for Education. These

General dependent variables were retained for further

stepwise discriminant analysis in relation to the Education

predictor variable.

For Tables 13 and 14 (which present the results of the

two categories of Race cluster analyses), the General

dependent variables labeled Structured, METs 1 Exertion,

METs 5 Exertion, METs 3 Exertion, Unsupervised, and Creative

met the criterion for tightness and similarity; however,

they did not appear in both the White and Black race tables.

These General level variables were retained for further

stepwise discriminant analysis.

Tables 15, 16, 17, and 18 present the results of the

cluster analyses of the four dimensions of the Work History

predictor variable. These dimensions were Data Oriented

Work History, People Oriented Work History, Things Oriented

Work History, and Ideas Oriented Work History. The variance

of the General dependent variables labeled METs 2 Exertion,










Pre-patterned, METs 3 Exertion, Unstructured, Structured,

METs 1 Exertion, Group Effort, Utilitarian, Creative, and

Abstract clustered tightly around Work History. Since these

General dependent variables clustered around Work History,

but did not cluster around all four dimensions of Work

History in the same pattern, they warranted more study using

stepwise discriminant analysis.

Tables 19 and 20 present the results of the cluster

analyses for the two categories of the Self Report of Health

predictor variable Restricting and Not Restricting. The

variance of the General dependent variables labeled METs 2

Exertion, Structured, METs 1 Exertion, METs 3 Exertion,

Pre-patterned clustered tightly around the Restricting

Health predictor variable. Since these General dependent

variables did not cluster around both categories (i.e.,

Restricting and Not Restricting) of the self-reported Health

variable, they warranted more study using stepwise

discriminant analysis.

Tables 21, 22, 23, and 24 present the results of the

cluster analyses for the four categories of the Household

Type predictor variable Living with Spouse, Alone, in

Group Quarters, and with Relatives. The variance of the

General dependent variables labeled Outdoor, Pre-patterned,

METs 1 Exertion, METs 2 Exertion, METs 3 Exertion, Group

Effort, Structured, Unstructured, Creative, and Unsupervised

clustered around the predictor variable Household Type.

Since these General dependent variables did not cluster









around the four categories of Household Type in the same

pattern, they warranted more study using stepwise

discriminant analysis.

Tables 25 and 26 present the results of the cluster

analyses for the two categories of the Self Reported Income

predictor variable Sufficient and Not Sufficient. The

variance of the General dependent variables labeled

Recognition, Structure, Pre-patterned, METs 1 Exertion, METs

3 Exertion, and Unstructured clustered around the Income

predictor variable. Since these General dependent variables

did not cluster around the two categories of Income in the

same pattern, they warranted more study using the stepwise

discriminant analysis.

Tables 27, 28, 29, 30, and 31 present the results of

the cluster analyses for the five categories of the

predictor variable Age (ages 60-64, 65-69, 70-74, 75-79, and

80 up). The variance of the General dependent variables

labeled METs 3 Exertion, Unsupervised, Unstructured,

Utilitarian, Pre-patterned, Group Effort, Structured, METs 2

Exertion, and Creative clustered around the Age predictor

variable. Since these General dependent variables did not

cluster around the 60-64 and the 80 up categories of Age

in the same pattern, they warranted more study using

stepwise discriminant analysis.









Table 8
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Gender Subaroun Men


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
Indoor
Aesthetic
Individual
Structured
Concrete
Outdoor
Unstructured
Recognition
Prepatterned
METs 3 Exertion
Unsupervised
METs 2 Exertion
Utilitarian
Supervised
Abstract
METs 4 Exertion
Group
Creative
METs 5 Exertion
Entertainment
Arts
Sports
Games
Crafts
Collecting
Nature
Organizational


74.87
97.09
99.07
98.95
98.03
97.90
95.83
95.68
95.53
95.21
94.31
94.23
93.47
93.28
92.80
92.53
92.37
91.56
91.32
89.55
85.74
81.11
80.31
77.94
76.19
76.09
74.50
71.88









Table 9
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Gender SubarouD Women


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
Indoor
Concrete
Individual
Aesthetic
Recognition
Unsupervised
METs 3 Exertion
Pre-patterned
Outdoor
Utilitarian
Unstructured
Group
Structured
Supervised
METs 4 Exertion
Abstract
METs 5 Exertion
Creative
Nature
Collecting
Arts
Sports
Crafts
Entertainment
Organizational
Games


72.71
95.75
98.89
98.92
99.18
98.49
98.20
97.95
97.69
97.60
96.86
94.45
94.44
94.39
94.93
94.05
94.29
92.57
89.16
87.64
85.74
83.86
82.90
79.22
78.47
76.97
75.09
72.71
o









Table 10
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Education Subgroup Elementary


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Indoor
Individual
Aesthetic
Pre-patterned
Structured
Concrete
Outdoor
Group
Recognition
Unsupervised
METs 4 Exertion
Unstructured
Supervised
Creative
METs 5 Exertion
Utilitarian
Abstract
Sports
Nature
Entertainment
Games
Collecting
Arts
Organizational
Crafts


62.63
95.78
98.42
98.75
99.38
99.01
98.56
98.25
98.26
98.38
97.85
97.49
97.19
96.24
95.38
94.27
93.55
92.97
92.41
92.44
85.09
84.49
83.37
79.40
77.40
77.36
69.70
62.63








Table 11
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Education Subaroun Hiah School


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Indoor
Concrete
Individual
Aesthetic
Outdoor
Unsupervised
Unstructured
Recognition
Utilitarian
METs 4 Exertion
Structured
Supervised
Pre-patterned
METs 2 Exertion
Abstract
Creative
Group
METs 5 Exertion
Arts
Entertainment
Collecting
Sports
Nature
Crafts
Organizational
Games


73.96
94.37
95.31
99.11
99.24
98.67
96.41
95.71
95.16
94.86
94.23
93.99
95.27
94.04
93.45
93.31
93.13
89.25
89.07
88.10
85.85
82.38
80.06
79.52
78.87
76.24
74.61
73.96








Table 12
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Education Subciroun Colleae


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
Indoor
Aesthetic
Pre-patterned
Individual
Recognition
Concrete
METs 3 Exertion
Outdoor
Structured
Utilitarian
Unsupervised
Unstructured
Group
Abstract
Supervised
METs 4 Exertion
METs 5 Exertion
Creative
Crafts
Collecting
Sports
Nature
Entertainment
Arts
Games
Organizational


74.60
96.43
98.03
99.29
99.27
99.00
98.21
98.12
97.26
97.61
96.40
95.84
95.55
95.23
94.36
92.60
91.71
91.39
89.53
88.54
83.62
81.38
80.63
80.66
80.44
78.96
77.15
74.60
u


Leisure Variables for Education Subaroun Colleae









Table 13
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Race Subgroup White


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
Indoor
Concrete
Individual
Aesthetic
Unsupervised
METs 3 Exertion
Creative
Recognition
Outdoor
Pre-patterned
METs 5 Exertion
Unstructured
Abstract
Supervised
Nature
Utilitarian
Collecting
Group
Structured
METs 4 Exertion
Entertainment
Crafts
Games
Sports
Arts
Organizational


61.60
95.79
99.52
99.65
99.62
98.29
98.22
98.23
97.32
96.50
96.11
95.76
95.58
93.48
91.69
92.08
91.55
89.84
87.65
90.14
89.64
87.00
85.73
79.94
76.50
72.10
71.47
61.60









Table 14
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Race Subgroup Black


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
Indoor
Concrete
Individual
Aesthetic
Unsupervised
METs 3 Exertion
Creative
Recognition
Outdoor
Pre-patterned
METs 5 Exertion
Unstructured
Abstract
Supervised
Nature
Utilitarian
Collecting
Group
Structured
METs 4 Exertion
Entertainment
Crafts
Games
Sports
Arts
Organizational


14
15
16
17
18
3
2'
21
22
23
24
25
26
27
28


61.60
95.79
99.52
99.65
99.62
98.29
98.22
98.23
97.32
96.50
96.11
95.76
95.58
93.48
91.69
92.08
91.55
89.84
87.65
90.14
89.64
87.00
85.73
79.94
76.50
72.10
71.47
61.60
cJ1









Table 15
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Occupation Subaroun Data


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
Indoor
Concrete
Individual
Aesthetic
Pre-patterned
Recognition
METs 3 Exertion
Unstructured
Unsupervised
Outdoor
METs 4 Exertion
Group
Structured
Supervised
Abstract
Utilitarian
Creative
METs 5 Exertion
Arts
Entertainment
Nature
Collecting
Games
Sports
Organizational
Crafts


74.31
94.04
99.39
99.59
99.85
98.57
98.56
98.40
98.22
98.27
97.51
96.57
95.12
97.89
98.02
94.50
93.98
93.15
91.75
87.74
84.89
83.36
82.25
79.28
78.28
76.79
75.30
74.31


Leisure Variables for Occunation Subaroun Data









Table 16
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Occupation SubQroup People


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
Utilitarian
METs 2 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Outdoor
Indoor
Individual
Aesthetic
Unsupervised
Concrete
Pre-patterned
Recognition
Structured
METs 4 Exertion
Supervised
Unstructured
Abstract
Group
METs 5 Exertion
Creative
Nature
Collecting
Crafts
Arts
Entertainment
Sports
Organizational
Games


75.44
94.70
94.75
96.06
97.42
97.54
99.11
98.85
97.71
97.59
96.81
96.76
95.77
95.63
94.10
92.73
90.76
89.94
89.84
84.46
84.21
83.38
79.30
79.14
77.57
77.24
76.04
75.44









Table 17
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables f or OccuDation Subaroun Thinas


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
Indoor
Individual
Concrete
Aesthetic
Outdoor
Unstructured
Recognition
Structured
Utilitarian
Supervised
METs 3 Exertion
Unsupervised
Pre-patterned
METs 2 Exertion
Creative
Abstract
Group
METs 4 Exertion
METs 5 Exertion
Entertainment
Sports
Arts
Crafts
Collecting
Games
Nature
Organizational


70.36
95.81
99.07
99.24
98.02
97.29
96.67
95.88
95.44
95.01
94.55
94.09
94.43
93.92
93.66
93.73
93.05
92.82
92.86
90.16
85.25
85.02
83.78
78.40
78.33
76.17
75.61
70.36


Leisure Variables for OccuDation Subaroun Thinas








Table 18
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Occupation


Subarouo Ideas


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
Group
METs 2 Exertion
Recognition
Indoor
Individual
Aesthetic
Pre-patterned
Concrete
Structured
Utilitarian
Creative
METs 3 Exertion
Outdoor
Abstract
Unstructured
Entertainment
METs 5 Exertion
METs 4 Exertion
Unsupervised
Sports
Arts
Crafts
Organizational
Supervised
Games
Nature
Collecting


65.58
98.94
98.39
98.96
98.34
99.80
99.74
99.60
99.50
98.47
98.23
98.06
97.93
96.98
96.41
95.80
94.23
90.50
90.60
95.20
90.49
86.90
80.94
83.81
73.98
72.20
67.28
65.58








Table 19
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Physical Subgroup Not Restricted


General Variable
Activity Name Number

METs 1 Exertion 1
METs 3 Exertion 3
Indoor 6
Individual 19
Aesthetic 25
Structured 20
Concrete 17
Recognition 24
Outdoor 7
METs 2 Exertion 2
Unsupervised 23
Unstructured 21
Pre-patterned 28
METs 4 Exertion 4
Abstract 16
Utilitarian 26
Supervised 22
Group 18
METs 5 Exertion 5
Entertainment 14
Creative 27
Arts 13
Crafts 12
Sports 9
Collecting 11
Nature 10
Games 8
Organizational 15


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


74.75
97.56
99.14
99.51
98.29
97.62
97.63
97.32
97.24
97.05
96.94
95.55
95.13
94.37
94.17
93.41
92.46
91.50
89.83
85.00
84.66
84.54
82.19
81.18
79.84
79.79
78.15
74.75 c
0








Table 20
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Physical Subgroup Restricted


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Indoor
Concrete
Individual
Aesthetic
Pre-patterned
Outdoor
Recognition
Unsupervised
Unstructured
Utilitarian
Group
Structured
Supervised
Creative
METs 4 Exertion
Abstract
METs 5 Exertion
Nature
Collecting
Arts
Sports
Entertainment
Crafts
Games
Organizational


73.49
94.23
95.29
95.13
98.93
98.76
98.89
97.60
96.89
96.36
95.25
95.19
95.31
95.43
94.84
93.73
92.92
92.59
91.51
89.07
81.14
80.89
80.52
79.70
79.42
74.90
74.41
73.49







Table 21
Cluster of General Level
With Spouse


Leisure Variables for Household


Tvye SubarouD Livina


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Indoor
Individual
Aesthetic
Concrete
Outdoor
Recognition
Pre-patterned
Structured
Unsupervised
Utilitarian
Unstructured
METs 4 Exertion
Supervised
Abstract
Group
METs 5 Exertion
Creative
Entertainment
Arts
Nature
Sports
Collecting
Crafts
Games
Organizational


72.37
95.21
95.24
95.80
98.88
99.00
98.18
96.81
96.19
96.08
95.04
94.66
94.43
94.35
92.84
91.99
92.09
91.17
88.41
86.73
82.51
82.24
79.70
79.48
78.93
78.17
72.62
72.37 D
1%








Table 22
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Livina Conditions Alone


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
Concrete
Individual
Aesthetic
Indoor
Pre-patterned
METs 3 Exertion
Recognition
Outdoor
Group
Structured
Unstructured
Unsupervised
Utilitarian
Creative
Abstract
METs 5 Exertion
METs 4 Exertion
Supervised
Arts
Games
Sports
Entertainment
Organizational
Collecting
Nature
Crafts


72.98
96.91
99.61
99.65
99.22
98.64
98.25
97.89
97.69
97.61
97.31
97.39
97.09
96.83
96.44
95.42
94.95
93.34
92.96
92.59
86.95
83.26
82.35
81.52
79.61
78.58
78.55
72.98 0
GO


Leisure Variables for Livina Conditions Alone







Table 23
Cluster of General Level


Quarters


Leisure Variables for Household TvDe Subaroun Groun


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Indoor
Individual
Aesthetic
Recognition
Concrete
Structured
Group
Unstructured
Creative
Unsupervised
Pre-patterned
Supervised
Outdoor
METs 4 Exertion
METs 5 Exertion
Collecting
METs 2 Exertion
Games
Abstract
Utilitarian
Sports
Nature
Organizational
Entertainment
Arts
Crafts


67.26
96.06
98.74
99.87
99.56
99.32
99.18
98.53
97.89
97.94
98.87
97.50
96.39
96.13
95.96
95.52
92.51
91.94
91.32
90.82
90.82
90.58
84.39
84.10
81.01
75.68
73.50
67.26









Table 24
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Household Type SubQroup Relatives


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Indoor
Individual
Aesthetic
Concrete
Recognition
Pre-patterned
Outdoor
Structured
Unsupervised
Unstructured
Utilitarian
Group
METs 4 Exertion
Supervised
Abstract
Creative
METs 5 Exertion
Entertainment
Arts
Sports
Collecting
Nature
Crafts
Games
Organizational


73.36
94.50
95.54
96.11
98.71
98.97
98.32
97.13
96.65
96.54
95.79
95.27
94.79
94.69
93.67
93.54
92.39
92.21
91.37
89.01
82.08
81.19
80.79
80.55
79.20
78.27
73.63
73.36








Table 25
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Income SubarouD Sufficient


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Simila- "Y
in Cluster When Cluster Formeq


METs 1 Exertion
Entertainment
METs 2 Exertion
Recognition
Creative
Indoor
Pre-patterned
Individual
Concrete
Unstructured
Unsupervised
METs 3 Exertion
Aesthetic
Outdoor
Supervised
METs 4 Exertion
Utilitarian
Crafts
METs 5 Exertion
Nature
Games
Abstract
Group
Structured
Sports
Collecting
Arts
Organizational


69.55
87.44
87.72
98.85
98.66
98.31
99.56
99.50
99.08
98.59
97.84
97.71
97.82
96.57
94.85
94.84
94.34
89.18
88.53
87.03
90.70
85.68
98.44
84.70
82.18
76.95
70.27
69.55








Table 26
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Income Subgroup Not Sufficient


General Variable
Activity Name Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items
in Cluster


Distance or Similarity
When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Indoor
Aesthetic
Individual
Concrete
Outdoor
Unsupervised
Unstructured
Pre-patterned
METs 2 Exertion
Recognition
Supervised
Abstract
Structured
Utilitarian
METs 4 Exertion
METs 5 Exertion
Games
Arts
Nature
Group
Creative
Entertainment
Organizational
Collecting
Sports
Crafts


73.15
97.01
98.61
99.75
99.67
99.63
98.21
98.05
97.97
97.13
98.45
96.40
94.93
94.57
94.42
94.09
92.50
91.38
88.08
86.62
85.18
85.85
84.38
83.70
78.04
76.17
74.89
73.15









Table 27
Cluster of General Level


Leisure Variables for Aae Subaroun 60/64


General
Variable Name


Variable
Number


Other Boundary
of Cluster


Number of Items Distance or Similarity
in Cluster When Cluster Formed


METs 1 Exertion
METs 2 Exertion
METs 3 Exertion
Outdoor
Indoor
Individual
Concrete
Aesthetic
Unsupervised
Pre-Patterned
Recognition
Creative
Utilitarian
Unstructured
Abstract
Group
Structured
Supervised
METs 4 Exertion
Entertainment
Organizational
Arts
METs 5 Exertion
Nature
Collecting
Crafts
Games
Sports


68.20
93.98
94.27
96.73
98.99
99.28
99.08
96.72
96.32
95.04
93.58
92.80
92.89
91.85
90.80
91.58
90.46
91.09
90.24
79.65
78.92
78.10
82.88
77.34
76.57
72.87
72.73
68.20




University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - Version 2.9.7 - mvs