Sosyal Yeterlik ve Rekreasyonel Katılım, Akış Deneyiminin Belirleyicileri midir?

Yıl 2022, Cilt: 9 Sayı: 2, 157 - 172, 29.12.2022

Savaş Duman , Şenay Şule Yurtdaş , Batuhan Ordu

https://doi.org/10.30803/adusobed.1213576

Cited By: 1

Öz

Bu araştırmada, akış deneyimi üzerinde rekreasyonel katılım ve sosyal yeterliğin etkilerini incelemek amaçlanmıştır. 345 üniversite öğrencisinin katıldığı araştırmada veri toplama araçları, rekreasyonel akış deneyimi ölçeği ve sosyal yeterlik ve sosyal sonuç bekleme ölçeği olarak belirlenmiştir. Elde edilen veriler, normal dağılım varsayımları altında test edilmiştir. Normal dağılım gösterdiği belirlenen verilerin analizinde Bağımsız Örneklem T Testi (tek kuyruk ve çift kuyruk), ANOVA, MANOVA ve Hiyerarşik Regresyon Analizi kullanılmıştır. Post hoc analizinde Scheffe ve Games-Howell Testi, Bonferroni düzeltmesi yapılarak kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada, rekreasyonel aktivitelere katılan öğrencilerin akış deneyimi, aktivitelere katılmayanlara göre önemli ölçüde yüksek elde edilmiştir. Rekreasyonel akış deneyiminin, aktivitelere daha sık, aktif ve grup olarak katılan öğrencilerde daha yüksek olduğu gözlenmiştir. Hiyerarşik regresyon analizine göre sosyal yeterlik, rekreasyonel akış deneyimine ilişkin toplam varyansın %71,8’ini; sosyal yeterlik ve sosyal sonuç beklentileri birlikte %72,3’ünü açıklamıştır. Değişkenlerin akış deneyimi üzerinde etki önem sırası, sosyal yeterlik (β=0,67; p≤0,001) ve sosyal sonuç beklentileri (β=0,191; p≤0,05) şeklindedir. Sonuç olarak, rekreasyonel katılım ve sosyal yeterliğin, akış deneyimlemede önemli bir faktör olduğu söylenebilir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

Rekreasyonel katılım, Akış deneyimi, Sosyal yeterlik

Kaynakça

• Ayhan, C., Eskiler, E., & Soyer, F. (2020). Rekreasyonel katılımcılarda akış deneyiminin ölçülmesi: Ölçek geliştirme ve doğrulama. Journal of Human Sciences, 17(4), 1297-1311.
• Bakioglu, F., & Turkum, A. S. (2017). Psychometric properties of adaptation of the social efficacy and outcome expectations scale to Turkish. European Journal of Educational Research, 6(2), 213-223.
• Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York, NY: W. H. Freeman.
• Bandura, A. (2006). Guide for constructing self-efficacy scales. F. Pajares & T. Urdan (Eds.), Self-efficacy beliefs of adolescents (s. 307-337) içinde. Charlotte, NC: Information Age.
• Bandura, A. (2012). On the functional properties of perceived self-efficacy revisited. Journal of Management, 38, 9–44.
• Bandura, A., Pastorelli, C., Barbaranelli, C., & Caprara, G. V. (1999). Self-efficacy pathways to childhood depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(2), 258–269.
• Bryan, H. (2000). Recreation specialization revisited. Journal of Leisure Research, 32, 18–21.
• Chang, H. H. (2017). Flow experience in the leisure activities of retirees. Loisir et Société / Society and Leisure, 40(3), 401–419.
• Cheng, T. M., & Lu, C. C. (2015). The casual relationships among recreational involvement, flow experience, and well-being for surfing activities. Asia Pacific of Tourism Research, 20(1), 1486-1504.
• Chiu, L. K. (2009). University students’ attitude, self-efficacy and motivation regarding leisure time physical participation. Journal of Educators and Education, 24, 1-15.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1975). Beyond boredom and anxiety: Experiencing flow in work and play. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1988). Motivation and creativity: Toward a synthesis of structural and energistic approaches to cognition. New Ideas in Psychology, 6(2), 159–176.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper and Row.
• Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1992). The flow experience and its significance for human psychology. M. Csikszentmihalyi & I. S. Csikszentmihalyi (Eds.), Optimal experience: Psychological studies of flow in consciousness (s. 15–35) içinde. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Csikzentmihalyi, M., & Hunter, J. (2003). Happiness in everyday life: The uses of experience sampling. M. Csikzentmihalyi (Ed.), Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (s. 89-101) içinde. Claremont, CA: Springer.
• Decloe, M. D., Kaczynski, A. T., & Havitz, M. E. (2009). Social participation, flow and situational ınvolvement in recreational physical activity. Journal of Leisure Research, 41(1), 73–91.
• Engeser, S., Schiepe-Tiska, A., & Peifer, C. (2021). Historical lines and an overview of current research on flow. C. Peifer ve S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research (s. 1-29) içinde. Germany: Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
• Flora, J., & Segrin, C. (1998). Joint leisure time in friend and romantic relationships: The role of activity type, social skills and positivity. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 711-718.
• Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., Anderson, R. E., & Tatham, R. (2013). Multivariate data analysis. UK: Pearson Education Limited.
• Havitz, M. E., & Mannell, R. C. (2005). Enduring involvement, situational involvement, and flow in leisure and non-leisure activities. Journal of Leisure Research, 37(2), 152–177.
• Havitz, M. E., Kaczynski, A. T., & Mannell, R. C. (2013). Exploring relationships between physical activity, leisure ınvolvement, self-efficacy, and motivation via participant segmentation. Leisure Sciences, 35(1), 45–62.
• Havitz, M. E., Kaczynski, A. T., & Mannell, R. C. (2013). Exploring relationships between physical activity, leisure ınvolvement, self-efficacy, and motivation via participant segmentation. Leisure Sciences, 35(1), 45–62.
• Heo, J., Lee, Y., Pedersen, P.M., & McCormick, B. P. (2010). Flow experience in the daily lives of older adults: An analysis of the ınteraction between flow, ındividual differences, serious leisure, location, and social context. Canadian Journal on Aging, 29(3), 411-423.
• Hoff, A. E., & Ellis, G. D. (1992). Influence of agents of leisure socialization on leisure self-efficacy of university students. Journal of Leisure Research, 24(2), 114–126.
• Jackman, P. C., Dargue, E. J., Johnston, J. P., & Hawkins, R. M. (2021). Flow in youth sport, physical activity, and physical education: A systematic review. Psychology of Sport and Exercise, 53, 101852.
• Kleiber, D. A., Larson, R. W., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1986). The experience of leisure in adolescence. Journal of Leisure Research, 18, 169-176.
• Krejcie, R. V., & Morgan, D. W. (1970). Determining sample size for research activities. Educational and Psychological Measurement. 30, 607 – 610.
• Larson, R., Mannell, R., & Zuzanek, J. (1986). Daily well-being of older adults with friends and family. Psychology and Aging, 1(2), 117–126.
• Lee, C., Payne, L. L., & Berdychevsky, L. (2018). The roles of leisure attitudes and self-efficacy on attitudes toward retirement among retirees: A sense of coherence theory approach. Leisure Sciences, 42(4), 1–18.
• Lee, H., Kim, J. & Bae, I. (2019). A research on the mediating role of flow experience between ınvolvement and satisfaction-focus on leisure satisfaction for university students. International Journal of Recent Technology and Engineering (IJRTE), 8(2-6).
• Magyaródi, T., & Oláh, A. (2015). A cross-sectional survey study about the most common solitary and social flow activities to extend the concept of optimal experience. Europe’s Journal of Psychology, 11(4), 632–650.
• Mannell, R. C., Kaczynski, A. T., & Aronson, R. M. (2005). Adolescent participation and flow in physically active leisure and electronic media activities: Testing the displacement hypothesis. Society and Leisure, 28(2), 653–675.
• Mittelstaedt, R. D., & Jones, J. J. (2009). Outdoor recreation self-efficacy: Scale development, reliability and validity. Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership, 1(1), 97-120.
• Moneta, G. B., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). The effect of perceived challenges and skills on the quality of subjective experience. Journal of Personality, 64(2), 275–310.
• Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2014). The concept of flow. M. Csikzentmihalyi (Ed.), Flow and the foundations of positive psychology (s. 239–263) içinde. Claremont, CA: Springer.
• Privette, G., & Bundrick, C. M. (1991). Peak experience, peak performance, and flow: Correspondence of personal descriptions and theoretical constructs. A. Jones, & R. Candall (Eds.) Handbook of Self- Actualization [Special Issue], Journal of Social Behavior and Personality, 6(5), 169–188.
• Salanova, M., Rodríguez-Sánchez, A. M., Schaufeli, W. B., & Cifre, E. (2014). Flowing together: A longitudinal study of collective efficacy and collective flow among workgroups. The Journal of Psychology, 148(4), 435–455.
• Schüler, J., & Engeser, S. (2009). Incentives and flow-experience in learning settings and the moderating role of individual differences. M. Wosnitza, S. A. Karabenick, A. Efklides, & P. Nenninger (Eds.), Contemporary motivation research: From global to local perspectives (s. 339–358) içinde. Göttingen: Hogrefe.
• Su, X., Xiang, P., McBride, R. E., Liu, J., & Thornton, M. A. (2016). At-risk boys’ social self-efficacy and physical activity self-efficacy in a summer sports camp. Journal of Teaching in Physical Education, 35(2), 159–168.
• Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (sixth ed.). Boston: Pearson.
• Tao, H., Zhou, Q., Tian, D., & Zhu, L. (2022). The effect of leisure ınvolvement on place attachment: Flow experience as mediating role. Land, 11(2), 151.
• Tian, H., Zhou, W., Qiu, Y., & Zou, Z. (2022). The role of recreation specialization and self-efficacy on life satisfaction: The mediating effect of flow experience. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(6), 3243.
• Walker, C. J. (2021). Social flow. C. Peifer ve S. Engeser (Ed.), Advances in flow research (s. 263-286) Germany: Switzerland: Springer Nature Switzerland AG.
• Webster, J., Trevino, K. L., & Ryan, L. (1993). The dimensionality and correlates of flow in human-computer interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 9(4), 411–426.
• Whitmore, J. G. (2005). Investigating and reconceptualizing recreation specialization: Flow as a developmental influence. Graduate student theses, The University of Montana, ABD.
• Wöran, B., & Arnberger, A. (2012). Exploring relationships between recreation specialization, restorative environments and mountain hikers’ flow experience. Leisure Sciences, 34(2), 95–114.
• Wright, S. L., Wright D. A., & Jenkins-Guarnieri, M. A. (2013). Development of the social efficacy and social outcome expectations scale. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and Development, 46(3), 218-231.
• Wu, T. C., Scott, D., & Yang, C. C. (2013). Advanced or addicted? Exploring the relationship of recreation specialization to flow experiences and online game addiction. Leisure Sciences, 35(3), 203