J A M E S M. R U B E N S T E I N

LEISURE

PARTICIPATION TWO

EUROPEAN

AND

SATISFACTION

IN

COMMUNITIES

ABSTRACT. This paper compares participation in leisure activities in the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg and Thionville, France. Factors associated with participation in different types of leisure activities, including health, status, household structure, attitudes towards leisure, and perceptions about leisure facilities are examined for the two communities. The study also compares the contribution of participation in different activities to satisfaction in the two countries. Data are based on a questionnaire distributed to a random sample of 95 elderly individuals living in Luxembourg's urban areas and 100 in Thionville. In general, differences in factors associated with participation are greater between the two countries than among different activities within each counti-y. The study concludes that elderly individuals derive different meaning from participation in leisure activities in Thionville and Luxembourg.

Key Words:Leisure, satisfaction, Luxembourg, France

INTRODUCTION This p a p e r e x a m i n e s f a c t o r s a s s o c i a t e d with p a r t i c i p a t i o n in leisure activities in two E u r o p e a n c o m m u n i t i e s a n d t h e c o n t r i b u t i o n o f leisure p a r t i c i p a t i o n to life satisfaction. Q u e s t i o n n a i r e s w e r e d i s t r i b u t e d to r a n d o m l y s e l e c t e d h o u s e h o l d s with a n e l d e r l y i n d i v i d u a l in Thionville, F r a n c e , a n d t h e G r a n d - D u c h y o f L u x e m b o u r g . T h r e e q u e s t i o n s a r e a d d r e s s e d here: 1. W h a t l e i s u r e activities a r e d o n e b y the e l d e r l y in e a c h c o m m u n i t y ? 2. H o w d o p e r s o n a l c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s a n d attitudes t o w a r d s leisure affect p a r t i c i p a t i o n in d i f f e r e n t t y p e s o f activities in t h e t w o c o u n t r i e s ? 3. F o r w h i c h l e i s u r e activities is p a r t i c i p a t i o n a s s o c i a t e d with satisfaction?

ISSUES

Participation in Leisure Activities E l d e r l y i n d i v i d u a l s p a r t i c i p a t e in a w i d e r a n g e o f leisure activities a n d for the m o s t p a r t m a k e selections similar to the p o p u l a t i o n as a w h o l e ( D e G r a z i a 1961). Studies that a c c u r a t e l y p i n p o i n t the a m o u n t o f t i m e s p e n t o n different d a i l y activities a r e difficult to u n d e r t a k e , b u t t h e r e is a c o n s e n s u s that the m o s t p o p u l a r leisure activities for all age g r o u p s a r e w a t c h i n g television, listening to the r a d i o , r e a d i n g b o o k s a n d / o r j o u r n a l s a n d visiting friends a n d / o r family ( M c A v o y 1979; Riley & F o n e r 1968).

Journal of Cross-Cuhural Gerontology2 (1987), 151--170. © 1987 by D. Reidel Publishing Company.

152

JAMES M. RUBENSTEIN

A second category consists of INsure activities that are relatively widespread but are less commonly and frequently done than the first group; these include participation in gardening, hobbies, voluntary associations, and travel. Other leisure activities are done by relatively few people and less frequently.

Factors Associated with Participation While analysts are relatively clear about the types of leisure activities done by the elderly population, they do not agree on why individuals participate in particular activities and on what meaning different people derive from different activities. Three personal characteristics appear to be associated with leisure participation. First is being in good enough health to participate (Bultena & Oyler 1971). Second, elderly individuals need enough money to engage in the activity without embarrassment. Social class has been shown to influence the choice of activities, as well as the frequency of participation (Havighurst 1973; Havighurst & FNgenbaum 1968). Third, elderly individuals need family or friends with whom to do the activity or at least who will encourage participation. Elderly individuals who live with spouse or other family or who have a cohort of retired friends are most likely to find the companionship and reinforcement for leisure participation (Thompson & Steib 1961). Other analysts claim that while personal characteristics may help in developing a profile of leisure participants, they do not help much in understanding leisure behavior (Kelly 1980; Smith 1983). Instead, leisure behavior of older people is considered a function of past experience and attitudes towards leisure: individuals who participated as a child and were encouraged by their parents are more likely to participate at an older age (Schreyer, Lime & Williams 1984; Sofranko & Nolan 1972; Spreitzer & Snyder 1983). Participation in some types of leisure activities may be encouraged or hindered primarily by characteristics of leisure facilities rather than by users (Stover & Garbin 1982). Relatively high participation levels may be found among elderly people living near greater opportunities, such as those offered in a university or retirement community (Bultena & Wood 1970; Morgan & Godbey 1978). Participation may be hindered by perception that recreation sites are too dirty, dangerous, crowded, and hard to reach (Atchley 1984; Lawton 1978; Smith 1983; Toseland & Rasch 1978).

Participation and Satisfaction A number of studies have shown that participation in leisure activities contributes significantly to life satisfaction, high morale, and adjustment to

LEISURE PARTICIPATION AND SATISFACTION

153

retirement (Bley, Goodman, Dye & Harel 1972; Decarlo 1974; Palmore 1979; Ragheb & Griffith 1982). Analysts disagree, though, on which leisure activities are and aren't associated with satisfaction and on why satisfaction is derived from participation in different leisure activities. Difficulty in determining what leisure activities bring satisfaction is due partly to lack of clear classification of leisure activities into useful categories. Lemon, Bengtson & Peterson (1972) distinguished among informal activities such as 'visiting family and friends, solitary activities such as hobbies, and formal activities such as attending clubs and church. However, some activities do not clearly fit one of these categories, and others could fall into more than one category. In several studies participation in informal leisure activities was correlated with satisfaction while the other two types weren't. Informal leisure activities provided elderly individuals with meaningful social roles to replace employment, self-esteem, and the confirming responses of others (Baldassare, Rosenfield & Rook 1984; Beiser 1975; Bull & Aucoin 1975; Cutler 1973; Edwards & Klemmack 1973; Lemon, Bengtson & Peterson 1972; Longino & Kart 1982). Other studies have found a correlation with satisfaction for a wide variety of leisure activities, not just informal ones (Graney 1975; Ragheb & Griffith 1982). Underlying the lack of consensus concerning the types of leisure activities that cause satisfaction is a more fundamental debate concerning the meaning of leisure to the elderly population. One view.is that leisure has meaning if it replaces roles lost because of retirement. Successful leisure activities are those that introduce aspects of the work environment such as usefulness, a sense of purpose, or self-respect. This view of the role of leisure is consistent with activity theory. Meaningful leisure activities substitute for work roles, and these are most likely to be the informal activities (Miller 1968). The alternate view is that leisure carries meaning aside from substitution for work, because people play many roles other than that of worker. For some people successful leisure may involve doing something useful but others may seek challenging new experiences, relaxation, or entertainment. Elderly individuals who do not derive meaning from leisure may be apathetic or are seeking an escape from realities of fife (Havighurst 1961). This view of the role of leisure is consistent with continuity theory: people have many roles, and most -- including leisure -- do not change with retirement. Therefore, satisfaction may be derived from solitary and formal activities as well as informal ones (Atchley 1984; George 1978). Most leisure studies have been done in the U.S., although participation in a variety of activities has been correlated with satisfaction in several industrial countries (Francken & van Raaij 1981; Palmore 1983; Shanas, Townsend, Wedderbum, Friis, Milhoj and Stehouwer 1968). Studies in other countries have shown that participation in leisure activities provides

154

JAMES M. RUBENSTEIN

elderly individuals with opportunities for social interaction and integration into the mainstream of daily life (Havighurst, Neugarten, Munnichs & Thomae 1969; Shanas et al. 1968). However, few cross-cultural studies have compared reasons for leisure participation or satisfaction derived from participation in different leisure activities. Are differences in factors associated with participation greater between different countries or between different activities? Personal characteristics, rather than attitudes and environmental factors, have been most often cited to explain frequency and type of leisure participation in a number of European studies (Duffield & Long 1977; Francken & van Raaij 1981). French social gerontologists in particular have found social class to be the main factor associated with participation in a variety of leisure activities, especially by Parisians (Benoit 1976; Dumazedier 1974; Guillemard 1975; Zarca 1974). Leisure activities by French working class elderly have been found to be minimal (Guillemard & Lenoir 1974), and the resulting isolation has been characterized as a "social death" (Guillemard 1972). There have been no studies of activities among the elderly in Luxembourg, but in many ways Luxembourg offers an ideal contrast to France. Although a neighbor of France, the relatively small country of Luxembourg (999 square miles and 364,602 inhabitants at the 1981 census) has a predominantly Germanic culture and an elderly population that displays sufficiently different social characteristics to justify a comparative study. The percentage of the native Luxembourg population over age 65 is the world's highest, at 17.0% in 1981, compared to 14.0% in France. The native Luxembourg population declined by 3.1% during the 1970s, primarily because of the world's lowest total fertility rate (1.4 in 1981) and crude birth rate (10.0 per 1,000 in 1981), and the number of deaths has exceeded births every year since 1970. France has a crude birth rate of approximately 15 per 1,000 and a TFR of 1.9. Luxembourg is one of the world's wealthiest countries, with a per capita gross national product of S14,340 in 1984. Only Switzerland and several mid-east oil-producing states were higher. The basis for the wealth is Luxembourg's "position as one of the world's leading iron and steel producers and by far the world's largest producer per capita or as a percentage of the country's industrial output (Als 1980). Backed by abundant steel industry revenues, Luxembourg has established one of the world's most generous pensions and other social insurance programs, with pensions normally ranging from a guaranteed minimum of S800 per month for one person (in 1983) to a maximum of approximately 85% of final salary. In comparison, France had a guaranteed minimum for one person of approximately $200 per month and a maximum of approximately 70% of final salary, depending on profession.

LEISURE PARTICIPATION AND SATISFACTION

155

Reliable information on total financial resources of the Luxembourg elderly is impossible to obtain because of extreme financial secrecy. As in Switzerland, Luxembourgers' bank accounts are confidential, and not even the census asks questions about income. However, pension and per capita GNP figures, combined with high rates of ownership of telephones, color televisions, dishwashers, and other consumer goods among the elderly, according to the census (Service Central de la Statistique et des Etudes 1983) clearly demonstrates that the material conditions of the Luxembourg elderly are much higher than those of their French neighbors.

DATA COLLECTION Data were collected by means of a questionnaire. Five kinds of data were collected: demographic, socioeconomic, health, household characteristics, and recreation participation and attitudes. Luxembourg respondents were asked to complete questionnaires themselves because of the complex language situation: Luxembourgers read and write in French or German but prefer to speak Luxembourgish, which is not a formal written language and not easily learned by foreigners. Following the practice of the country's census bureau, the survey was written in simultaneous French and German. Because approximately 90% of Luxembourg elderly have a telephone and are listed in one directory for the entire country, a random sample of addresses was generated from the directory. Surveys were mailed to 2,000 addresses, with the expectation that approximately 500 would have an individual over age 60. A follow-up letter was sent six weeks later to thank respondents, remind those who had not yet responded, and apologize to those who were under 60. Ultimately, 138 elderly individuals completed surveys, a response rate of approximately 28%. Although the survey was an inefficient method, consultations with government officials, including the census director and mayor of Luxembourg City, indicated that other approaches of generating a sample and securing participation would run greater risks of not being random in a small country where people strongly guarded their privacy and there was no tradition of survey research. The post office cooperated by offering low postage rates and not requiring stamps on return envelopes. They kept a tally of those actually returned and provided a single bill at a reduced rate at the end of the project. Respondents living in rural areas were excluded from this analysis. The remaining sample consisted of 95 respondents who lived in the country's two largest towns -- Luxembourg City (78,924 inhabitants in 1981) and

156

J A M E S M. R U B E N S T E I N

E s c h - s u r - A l z e t t e ( 2 5 , 1 4 2 i n h a b i t a n t s in 1 9 8 1 ) - - a n d the s u b u r b s s u r r o u n d i n g the two m a i n towns. T h i o n v i l l e was s e l e c t e d for the F r e n c h p o r t i o n o f t h e s t u d y b e c a u s e it was less t h a n o n e h o u r f r o m L u x e m b o u r g , a n d its age a n d social s t r u c t u r e c o r r e s p o n d e d closely to figures for F r a n c e as a whole. T h i o n v i l l e (with 4 4 , 1 9 1 i n h a b i t a n t s in 1 9 8 1 ) was also c o m p a r a b l e in size to L u x e m b o u r g City a n d Esch. In Thionville, a r a n d o m list o f a d d r e s s e s was g e n e r a t e d f r o m the t e l e p h o n e d i r e c t o r y , a n d a s u r v e y e r visited the a d d r e s s e s . If an i n d i v i d u a l o v e r 60 lived t h e r e a q u e s t i o n n a i r e was d r o p p e d off a n d l a t e r retrieved. If n o e l d e r l y i n d i v i d u a l lived in the h o u s e h o l d , a d j a c e n t dwellings w e r e visited unitil an e l d e r l y i n d i v i d u a l was found. P e r m i s s i o n to c o n d u c t the s u r v e y was given b y T h i o n v i l l e ' s m a y o r . S e l e c t e d c h a r a c t e r i s t i c s o f r e s p o n d e n t s a r e s h o w n in T a b l e I. D i s t r i b u tions b y age a n d sex f o r the s u r v e y e d L u x e m b o u r g p o p u l a t i o n differed little f r o m the n a t i o n a l figures; m a r r i e d i n d i v i d u a l s w e r e u n d e r r e p r e s e n t e d TABLE I Selected characteristics of respondents

Excellent or good health (self-assessment) Dz/ilyactivity problems Climbing stairs Cleaning Shopping Walking Cooking Reading Agree that health is too poor to participate Currently employed Former occupation White collar Blue collar Housework Other/unknown Primary school education only Owner-occupant Pension only income source Agree that income is inadequate to participate Over age 75 Female household head Married Live alone Children in same building or town ** p < .01

All figures are percentages.

Thionville

Luxembourg

47.0

54.7

42.0 30.0 31.0 36.0 17.0 15.0 43.0 3.0

37.9 24.2 18.9 15.8 17.9 12.6 31.6 8.4

48.0 14.0 27.0 11.0 54.0 46.0 78.0 30.0 29.0 49.0 52.0 35.0 39.0

**

**

46.3 14.7 24.2 14.7 48.4 67.4 72.6 25.3 28.4 58.9 38.9 48.4 36.8

LEISURE PARTICIPATION AND SATISFACTION

157

in the survey, while widowed individuals were overrepresented. Compared to the total elderly population in Luxembourg, the sample group was more likely to live alone and less likely to live with spouse or children. In Thionville female household heads were underrepresented, but the percentages of respondents over 75, married, and living alone were close to national averages for all French elderly. Approximately two-thirds of Luxembourg respondents owned their dwellings, compared to less than half of Thionville respondents, but both figures are close to their respective national averages.

RESULTS

Participation Respondents were asked to indicate from a checklist of 32 items the leisure activities they undertook regularly and whether they normally did the activity alone, with friends, or with family. As in other countries, by far the most widespread activities were reading journals, watching television, and listening to the radio. Activities regularly pursued by at least one-third of respondents in both countries included walking -- both in the country and city -- international travel, visiting friends and family, shopping for nonfood items, reading books, and attending church. At least 20% of the sample in both Luxembourg and Thionvllle regularly visited a caf6, patisserie, or restaurant, played cards, knitted, or worked in a garden. At least 10% in both communities participated regularly in swimming, going to concerts and museums, picnicking, handcrafts, gymnastics, and other hobbies (such as collecting stamps or coins). Significant differences between the French and Luxembourg respondents were found for only 5 of the 32 activities. Thionville's elderly population was more likely to read books and go the cinema, while elderly Luxembourgers were more likely to travel, go to a caf6 or patisserie, and bowl (a local variation called kehlen). Activities were divided among informal, solitary, and formal activities. Attending clubs and church were considered formal activities. Solitary activities were done alone by at least three-fourths of respondents, according to the surveys, while informal activities were done with others by at least three-fourths of the respondents. Only two activities could not be classified as informal or solitary based on this method -- shopping for nonfood items and walking in town. These two closely associated activities were each done with others by approximately 60% of respondents and therefore were considered informal activities.

J A M E S M. R U B E N S T E I N

158

TABLE II Participation in different leisure activities

lnformal Walk in the country Walk in the city Visit family Shop (not for food) Visit friends Travel Go to restaurant Picnicking Go to caf~ or patisserie Play cards Go to concert Go to museum Fish Go to cinema Swim Camp Bowl Play golf Sail ** p < . 0 1

Thi.

Lux.

58.0 52.0 51.0 43.0 43.0 34.0 22.0 21.0 20.0 20.0 19.0 17.0 12.0 11.0 7.0 5.0 3.0 1.0 0.0

57.9 49.5 38.9 38.9 33.7 ** 57.9 26.3 14.7 * 33.7 21.1 ' 15.8 14.7 6.3 * 2.1 16.8 2.1 * 11.6 2.1 0.0

Tiff.

Lux.

Solitary Watch television Read journals Listen to radio Readbooks Gardening Do handcrafts Knit Do hobbies Do gymnastics Paint

95.0 82.0 82.0 60.0 31.0 30.0 22.0 15.0 11.0 6.0

Formal Attend church Go to clubs

41.0 12.0

N

100

*

87.4 89.5 74.7 42.1 44.2 17.9 22.1 11.6 16.8 1.1

38.9 7.4 95

* p

Leisure participation and satisfaction in two European communities.

This paper compares participation in leisure activities in the Grand-Duchy of Luxembourg and Thionville, France. Factors associated with participation...
1005KB Sizes 0 Downloads 0 Views