Diversity of Leisure Behavior and Personality Potential as Predictors of Psychological Well-Being
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2024.6.2524Keywords:
leisure activity, quality of life, subjective well-being, personality potential, population surveyAbstract
The study is a part of the preliminary stage of the project spanning psychology and sociology, aimed at investigating the associations between objective and subjective indices of the quality of life and personality variables aggregated in a compound index of personality potential. The study was carried out using a representative sample of the population of Tomsk region, Russia, which was selected from four townships, including the regional center. The traditional methodology of direct inquiry was combined with brief psychological scales to assess indicators of positive personality functioning. The final database included 1511 respondents and 187 variables.
The data analysis revealed the respondents' preferred leisure activities, taking into account the township specifics that limit the possibility of arriving at a general classification of leisure forms. Regression analysis of the predictors of leisure activities with the personality potential index added to the regression equation at the second step revealed that the strongest predictors of the choice of forms of leisure among the demographic variables were age, education, and material wealth. The personality potential index added a modest yet significant share of explained variance. The most informative variable was the variety of leisure forms. It has also significantly predicted all the variables referred to subjective well-being. Personality potential was the strongest predictor of all the well-being indices, which accounted for a more significant share of variance than demographic and leisure variables. The study thus sheds light upon the interrelation between the objective, subjective, and agentic quality of life variables in the context of leisure activities.
Acknowledgment. The article was prepared in the International Laboratory of Positive Psychology of Personality and Motivation of HSE University, Moscow, Russia, in the framework of a research grant funded by the Ministry of Science and Higher Education of the Russian Federation (grant ID: 075-15-2022-325).
References
Аргайл М. Психология счастья. М.: Питер, 2003.
Argyle M. (2003) The Psychology of Happiness. Moscow: Piter. (In Russ.)
Арямова Т.В. Занятия россиян в свободное время // Вестник Таганрогского института управления и экономики. 2014. № 1. С. 63-67. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/zanyatiya-rossiyan-v-svobodnoe-vremya (дата обращения: 07.07.2024).
Aryamova T.V. (2014) The Activities of Russians in Their Free Time. Bulletin of TIU&E. No. 1. P. 63-67. URL: https://cyberleninka.ru/article/n/zanyatiya-rossiyan-v-svobodnoe-vremya (accessed: 07.07.2024). (In Russ.)
Гордеева Т. О., Сычев О. А., Осин Е. Н. Диагностика диспозиционного оптимизма, валидность и надежность опросника ТДО-П // Психология. Журнал Высшей школы экономики. 2021. Т. 18. № 1. С. 34—55. http://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2021-1-34-55.
Gordeeva T., Sychev O., Osin E. (2021) Diagnostics of Dispositional Optimism: Validity and Reliability of Russian Version of LOT-R. Psychology. Journal of Higher School of Economics. Vol. 19. No. 1. P. 34—55. http://doi.org/10.17323/1813-8918-2021-1-34-55. (In Russ.)
Давыдова Н.М. Досуговые предпочтения населения в пореформенной России // Изменяющаяся Россия в зеркале социологии / под ред. М.К. Горшкова, Н.Е. Тихоновой. М.: Летний сад, 2004. С. 145—159.
Davydova N.M. (2004) Leisure Preferences of the Population of Post-Reform Russia. In: M.K. Gorshkov, N.E. Tikhonova (eds.) Changing Russia in the Mirror of Sociology. Moscow: Letny sad. P. 145—159. (In Russ.)
Дымшиц М.Н. Социальные и экономические аспекты потребительского поведения на рынке развлекательных услуг // Вестник РГГУ. Серия: Экономика. Управление. Право. 2012. Вып. 10. С. 234—245.
Dymshits M.N. (2012) Social and Economic Aspects of Consumer Behavior on the Market of Entertainment Services. Bulletin of Russian State University for Humanities. Series: Economics, Management, Law. Vol. 10. P. 234—245. (In Russ.)
Ишанов С.А., Осин Е.Н., Костенко В.Ю. Личностное развитие и качество уединения // Культурно-историческая психология. 2018. Т. 14. № 1. C. 30—40. https://doi.org/10.17759/chp.2018140104
Ishanov S.A., Osin E.N., Kostenko V.Y. (2018) Personality Development and the Quality of Solitude. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya = Cultural-Historical Psychology. Vol. 14. No. 1. P. 30—40. (In Russ.)
Каравай А. Досуговая активность российской молодежи: основные типы и факторы выбора // Вестник общественного мнения. 2020. № 1-2. С. 130-140. URL: https://www.levada.ru//cp/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/vom1-2020.pdf (дата обращения: 07.07.2024).
Karavai A. (2020) Leisure Activity of Russian Youth: The Main Types and Factors of Choice. Public Opinion Herald. No. 1-2. P. 130-140. URL: https://www.levada.ru//cp/wp-content/uploads/2020/08/vom1-2020.pdf (accessed: 07.07.2024). (In Russ.)
Латова Н. В. Досуговые практики российских работников как фактор формирования их человеческого потенциала // Социологические исследования. 2019. № 11. С. 63-72. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250007452-0.
Latova N.V. (2019) Leisure Practices of Russian Employees as A Factor of Their Human Potential Formation. Sociological Studies. No. 11. P. 63-72. https://doi.org/10.31857/S013216250007452-0. (In Russ.)
Леонтьев Д.А. Культурное потребление в антропологическом и психологическом контексте // Культурология: фундаментальные основания прикладных исследований / под ред. И.М. Быховской. М.: Смысл, 2010. С. 217—241.
Leontiev D.A. (2010) Cultural Consumption in the Anthropological and Psychological Contexts. In: Bykhovskaya I.M. (ed.) Culturology: Fundamentals of Applied Research. Moscow: Smysl. P. 217—241. (In Russ.)
Леонтьев Д.А. Качество жизни и благополучие: объективные, субъективные и субъектные аспекты // Психологический журнал. 2020. Т. 41. № 6. С. 98—107. https://doi.org/10.31857/S020595920012592-7.
Leontiev D.A. (2020) Quality of Life and Well-Being: Objective, Subjective and Agentic Aspects. Psikhologicheskii zhurnal. Vol. 41. No. 6. P. 86—95. https://doi.org/10.31857/S020595920012592-7. (In Russ.)
Леонтьев Д.А. Личностный потенциал: оптика психологии // Образовательная политика. 2023. № 2. С. 20—30.
Leontiev D.A. (2023) Human Images: from «faceted Vision» to Homo Complexus. Educational Politics. No/ 2. P. 20—30. (In Russ.)
Леонтьев Д. А., Осин Е. Н., Луковицкая Е. Г. Диагностика толерантности к неопределенности: шкалы Д. Маклейна. М.: Смысл, 2016.
Leontiev D.A., Osin E.N., Lukovitskaya E.G. (2016) Diagnostics of Tolerance for Ambiguity: D. McLein’s Scales. Moscow: Smysl. (In Russ.)
Осин Е.Н. Факторная структура краткой версии Теста жизнестойкости // Организационная психология. 2013. Т. 3. № 3. С. 42—60. URL: https://orgpsyjournal.hse.ru/2013-3-3/117908592.html (дата обращения: 07.07.2024).
Osin E.N. (2013) Factor Structure of the Short Version of the Test of Hardiness. Organizational Psychology. Vol. 3. No. 3. P. 42—60. URL: https://orgpsyjournal.hse.ru/2013-3-3/117908592.html (accessed: 07.07.2024). (In Russ.)
Осин Е. Н., Леонтьев Д. А. Краткие русскоязычные шкалы диагностики субъективного благополучия: психометрические характеристики и сравнительный анализ // Мониторинг общественного мнения: экономические и социальные перемены. 2020. № 1. С. 117—142. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.06.
Osin E.N., Leontiev D.A. (2020) Brief Russian-Language Instruments to Measure Subjective Well-Being: Psychometric Properties and Comparative Analysis. Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes. No. 1. P.117—142. https://doi.org/10.14515/monitoring.2020.1.06. (In Russ.)
Осин Е. Н., Рассказова Е. И. Краткая версия теста жизнестойкости: психометрические характеристики и применение в организационном контексте // Вестник Московского университета. Серия 14. Психология. 2013. № 2. С. 147—165.
Osin E.N., Rasskazova E.I. (2013). A Brief Version of Hardiness Test: Psychometric Properties and Application in the Organizational Context. Moscow University Bulletin. Series 14. Psychology. No. 2. P. 147—165. (In Russ.)
Рощина Я.М. Дифференциация стилей жизни россиян в поле досуга // Экономическая социология. 2007. Т. 8. № 4. С. 23-42.
Roschina Ya.M. (2007) Differentiation of Russians’ life styles in the field of leisure. Economic Sociology. Vol 8. No. 4. P. 23-42. (In Russ.)
Сапронов Д. В., Леонтьев Д. А. Личностный динамизм и его диагностика // Психологическая диагностика. 2007. No. 1. С. 66—84.
Sapronov D.V., Leontiev D.A. (2007) Personal Dynamism and Its Assessment. Psychological Assessment. No. 1. P. 66—84 (In Russ.)
Седова Н.Н. Досуговая активность граждан // Социологические исследования. 2009. № 12. C. 56-68.
Sedova N.N. (2009) Leisure Activity of Population. Sociological Studies. Vol. 12. P. 56-68. (In Russ.)
Brajša-Žganec A., Merkaš M., Šverko I. (2011) Quality of Life and Leisure Activities: How do Leisure Activities Contribute to Subjective Well-Being? Social Indicators Research. Vol. 102. P. 81—91. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11205-010-9724-2.
Csikszentmihalyi M., LeFevre J. (1989) Optimal Experience in Work and Leisure. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 56. No. 5. P. 815—822. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-3514.56.5.815.
Dumazedier J. (1974) Sociology of Leisure. Amsterdam: Elsevier.
Iso-Ahola S.E., Baumeister R. (2023) Leisure and Meaning in Life. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 14. Art. 1074649. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2023.1074649.
Joireman J., King S. (2016) Individual Differences in the Consideration of Future and (More) Immediate Consequences: A Review and Directions for Future Research. Social and Personality Psychology Compass. Vol. 10. No. 5. P. 313—326. https://doi.org/10.1111/spc3.12252.
Kuper N., Kroencke L., Harari G. M., Denissen J. J. (2023) Who Benefits from Which Activity? On the Relations Between Personality Traits, Leisure Activities, and Well-Being. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. Vol. 125. No. 1. P. 141—172. https://doi.org/10.1037/pspp0000438.
Lloyd K. M., Auld C. J. (2002) The Roles of Leisure in Determining Quality of Life: Issues of Content and Measurement. Social Indicators Research. Vol. 57. No. 1. P. 43—71. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1013879518210.
Manners J., Durkin K. (2001) A Critical Review of the Validity of Ego Development Theory and Its Measurement. Journal of Personality Assessment. Vol. 77. No. 3. P. 541—567. https://doi.org/10.1207/S15327752JPA7703_12.
Nawijn J., Veenhoven R. (2013) Happiness through Leisure. In: T. Freire (ed.) Positive Leisure Science: From Subjective Experience to Social Contexts. Dordrecht: Springer Science+Business Media. P. 193—209. http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/978-94-007-5058-6_11.
Newman D.B, Tay L., Diener E. (2014) Leisure and Subjective Well-Being: A Model of Psychological Mechanisms as Mediating Factors. Journal of Happiness Studies. Vol. 15. P. 555—578. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10902-013-9435-x.
Osin E. N., Boniwell I. (2024) Positive Time Use: A Missing Link Between Time Perspective, Time Management, and Well-Being. Frontiers in Psychology. Vol. 15. Art. 1087932. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1087932.
Parsons H., Mackenzie S.H., Filep S., & Brymer E. (2019). Subjective Well-being and leisure. In: W. Leal Filho et al. (eds.) Good Health and Well-Being. Cham: Springer. P. 1-10.
Preacher K. J., Rucker D. D., Hayes A. F. (2007) Addressing Moderated Mediation Hypotheses: Theory, Methods, and Prescriptions. Multivariate Behavioral Research. Vol. 42. No. 1. P. 185—227. https://doi.org/10.1080/00273170701341316.
Roberts K. (2015) Leisure, Sociology of. In: Wright J.D. (ed.) International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral Sciences. Amsterdam: Elsevier. P. 853-858. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-08-097086-8.32144-4.
Sirgy M.J., Uysal M., Kruger S. (2017) Towards a Benefits Theory of Leisure Well-Being. Applied Research in Quality of Life. Vol. 12. P. 205—228. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11482-016-9482-7.
Snyder C. R., Rand K. L., Sigmon D. R. (2002) Hope Theory. In: C. R. Snyder, S. J. Lopez (eds.) Handbook of Positive Psychology. New York, NY: Oxford University Press. P. 257—276.
Stebbins R. (2021) Serious Leisure. Society. Vol. 35. No. 4. P. 53—57.
Vittersø J. (2011) Recreate or Create? Leisure as an Arena for Recovery and Change. In: R. Biswas-Diener (ed.) Positive Psychology as Social Change. New York, NY: Springer Science+Business Media B.V. P. 293—308. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-90-481-9938-9_16.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Copyright (c) 2024 Monitoring of Public Opinion: Economic and Social Changes
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
