Recreation specialization proposes that participation in an activity progresses along a continuum from general to specific modes of perception and behavior. Research typically measures an individual's position on that continuum by an additive index comprised of items that reflect multiple dimensions of specialization including past experience, commitment to the activity, centrality to lifestyle, and skill. This paper investigates the theoretical limitations of a specialization continuum, and the problems inherent in an additive index used to measure specialization. This study presents data from a 1988 study on the Ocoee River in Tennessee exploring how each of these hypothesized dimensions of specialization differentially affect user (1) motives for participation, (2) perceptions of crowding, and (3) preferences for management action. Factor analysis of 11 different specialization variables produced three specialization dimensions including (1) a past experience dimension, (2) a commitment dimension, and (3) a lifestyle dimension. Differences between the zero order correlations of three separate index scores for each dimension were tested on twenty different motive, crowding, and management items. Results show these dimensions are differentially related to user evaluations and attitudes, and confirm that an additive index that reflects a continuum from general to specific slights the complexity of the specialization process. Further, the lifestyle and commitment dimensions covaried with past experience among the less experienced users, but leveled off or diminished at the upper levels of experience. These findings suggest the need for alternate research strategies that explore the conceptual and methodological detail of these multiple dimensions, and that account for historical fluctuations or ceiling effects that may characterize commitment and lifestyle involvement.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kuentzel et al. (1992) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: