SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Uluslararası Rekreasyon ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi / 2026 / Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1

Identifying Leisure Time Barriers in Campus Recreation for University Students

Üniversite Öğrencilerinin Kampüs Rekreasyonu Kapsamında Serbest Zaman Engellerinin Belirlenmesi

Tolga Hanayoğlu(YOZGAT BOZOK ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0001-7747-5782
Pages
53–69
Publication Date
2026-06-27
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Consequently, it was determined that the highest level of perceived constraint among participants was in the time sub-dimension, while the lowest constraint perception was identified in the secure environment dimension.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:The objective of this study is to identify the leisure constraints limiting the participation of university students in campus recreation activities and to examine whether these constraints vary according to demographic variables.
📊
Key Findings & Data:The population of the study consists of students studying at Yozgat Bozok University, while the sample consists of a total of 366 participants selected through the simple random sampling method.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Consequently, it was determined that the highest level of perceived constraint among participants was in the time sub-dimension, while the lowest constraint perception was identified in the secure environment dimension.
🔬Design:Survey & Empirical Study
📍Scope:2025 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Kampüs Rekreasyonu · Serbest Zaman Engelleri · Üniversite Öğrencileri

Abstract

The objective of this study is to identify the leisure constraints limiting the participation of university students in campus recreation activities and to examine whether these constraints vary according to demographic variables. The population of the study consists of students studying at Yozgat Bozok University, while the sample consists of a total of 366 participants selected through the simple random sampling method. The personal information form and the “Leisure Constraints for Campus Recreation Scale” which was adapted into Turkish culture by Yılmaz and Altunöz (2025), were utilized as the primary data collection instruments. The research design employed a general survey model among quantitative research methods. Following the acquisition of ethical committee approval, the administration of the questionnaires was conducted face-to-face and through digital forms under researcher coordination, in accordance with the principle of voluntary participation. All data were transferred to the SPSS 24.0 program for analysis. The analysis of the data was conducted using various statistical methods, including independent samples T-test, one-way analysis of variance (ANOVA), and post-hoc analyses for differences. All analyses were evaluated at a significance level of p<.05. Consequently, it was determined that the highest level of perceived constraint among participants was in the time sub-dimension, while the lowest constraint perception was identified in the secure environment dimension.

Özet

Bu çalışmanın amacı, üniversite öğrencilerinin kampüs rekreasyon etkinliklerine katılımlarını sınırlayan serbest zaman kısıtlarını belirlemek ve bu kısıtların demografik değişkenlere göre farklılaşıp farklılaşmadığını incelemektir. Araştırmanın evrenini Yozgat Bozok Üniversitesinde öğrenim gören öğrenciler oluştururken, örneklemini basit rastgele örnekleme yöntemiyle seçilen toplam 366 katılımcı oluşturmaktadır. Veri toplama aracı olarak kişisel bilgi formu ile Yılmaz ve Altunöz (2025) tarafından Türk kültürüne uyarlanan “Kampüs Rekreasyonu İçin Serbest Zaman Kısıtları Ölçeği” kullanılmıştır. Araştırmada nicel araştırma yöntemleri kapsamında genel tarama modeli benimsenmiştir. Etik kurul onayının alınmasının ardından, anketler gönüllülük esasına uygun olarak araştırmacı koordinasyonunda yüz yüze ve dijital ortamda uygulanmıştır. Toplanan tüm veriler analiz edilmek üzere SPSS 24.0 programına aktarılmıştır. Verilerin analizinde bağımsız örneklemler t-testi, tek yönlü varyans analizi (ANOVA) ve farklılıkların belirlenmesine yönelik post-hoc analizleri gibi çeşitli istatistiksel yöntemler kullanılmıştır. Tüm analizler p<.05 anlamlılık düzeyinde değerlendirilmiştir. Sonuç olarak, katılımcıların algıladıkları kısıtlar arasında en yüksek düzeyin zaman alt boyutunda, en düşük düzeyin ise güvenli ortam boyutunda olduğu belirlenmiştir.

🔖

Cite This Article

Hanayoğlu, T. (2026). Identifying Leisure Time Barriers in Campus Recreation for University Students. Uluslararası Rekreasyon ve Spor Bilimleri Dergisi, Cilt: 10 Sayı: 1, 53–69. https://doi.org/10.46463/ijrss.1868491

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (63)

  1. Allison, K. R., Dwyer, J. J. M., & Makin, S. (1999). Perceived barriers to physical activity among high school students. Preventive Medicine, 28(6), 608–615. https://doi.org/10.1006/pmed.1999.0489
  2. Astin, A. W. (1999). Student involvement: A developmental theory for higher education. Journal of College Student Development, 40(5), 518–529.
  3. Barakazı, E. (2022). Campus recreation. In A. Öztürkçü Akçay (Ed.), International research in social, human and administrative sciences III (pp. 121–129). Eğitim Publishing.
  4. Boothby, J., Tungatt, M. F., & Townsend, A. R. (1981). Ceasing participation in sports activity: Reported reasons and their implications. Journal of Leisure Research, 13(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1981.11969464
  5. Bosna, O. Ş., Bayazıt, B., & Yılmaz, O. (2018). Investigation of the factors preventing university students from participating in recreational activities: The case of Uskudar University. CBU Journal of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, 13(2), 200–211.
  6. Büyüköztürk, Ş. (2020). Manual of data analysis for social sciences (26th ed.). Pegem Akademi.
  7. Coakley, J. J., & White, A. (1992). Making decisions: Gender and sports participations among British adolescents. Sociology of Sport Journal, 9(1), 20–35. https://doi.org/10.1123/ssj.9.1.20
  8. Cochran, W. G. (1977). Sampling techniques (3rd ed.). John Wiley & Sons.
  9. Crawford, D. W., & Godbey, G. (1987). Reconceptualizing barriers to family leisure. Leisure Sciences, 9(2), 119–127. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490408709512151
  10. Crawford, D. W., Jackson, E. L., & Godbey, G. (1991). A hierarchical model of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences, 13(4), 309–320. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490409109513147
  11. Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches (5th ed.). Sage Publications.
  12. Çevik, H., Yılmaz, E., & Korkmaz, A. (2019). Sport experience on campus: Investigation of university students’ campus recreational sport experience. Gaziantep University Journal of Sport Sciences, 4(3), 346–359. https://doi.org/10.31680/gaunbesbd.615174
  13. Çuhadar, A. (2024). The mediating role of physical and psychosocial benefits in the effect of leisure involvement on happiness (Unpublished doctoral dissertation). Karamanoglu Mehmetbey University.
  14. Çuhadar, A. (2025). The correct use of free time: The importance of recreational sports in preventing internet gambling addiction. Sportive, 8(2), 33–49. https://doi.org/10.53025/sportive.1727840
  15. Demir, S., Geyik, H., Arı, B., Evirgen, Ş., Türker, A., & Güzel, E. (2026). Investigation of recreation benefits and recreation area participation barriers in undergraduate students. Nortis Journal of Sport Sciences, 2(1), 21–35. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.18109993
  16. Duran, S., & Ünal, A. (2025). Factors hindering leisure and recreation activities as a touristic and social right: The case of Sinop University. Journal of Gastronomy, Hospitality and Travel, 8(1), 28–43. https://doi.org/10.33083/joghat.2025.152
  17. Emir, E., Küçük Kılıç, S., Gürbüz, B., & Öncü, E. (2022). Participation of Turkish women in leisure activities: Barriers and facilitators. Turkiye Klinikleri Journal of Sports Sciences, 14(1), 69–78. https://doi.org/10.5336/sportsci.2021-84473
  18. Erkman, U. (1990). Planning and design problems on university campuses in terms of growth and development problems. ITU Faculty of Architecture Press.
  19. Forrester, S. (2015). The benefits of recreational sports participation in college: Results of the 2013 NASPA assessment and knowledge consortium study. Recreational Sports Journal, 39(1), 2–15. https://doi.org/10.1123/rsj.2014-0046
  20. Gegez, A. E. (2010). Marketing research. Beta Publishing.
  21. George, D., & Mallery, P. (2010). SPSS for Windows step by step: A simple guide and reference (Version 17.0 update)(10th ed.). Pearson.
  22. Goins, B. (2020). Generation Z’s leisure constraints for campus recreation: Technology’s influence on constraints (Unpublished master’s thesis). Oklahoma State University.
  23. Greendorfer, S. L. (1993). Gender role stereotypes and early childhood socializations. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 11(3), 327–340. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-6402.1987.tb00907.x
  24. Güler, C., Harmandar Demirel, D., Çakır, V. O., & Budak, D. (2020). Strategies for coping with leisure constraints: The case of university students. Turkish Studies - Social, 15(4), 1919–1930. https://doi.org/10.29228/TurkishStudies.43477
  25. Haines, D. J. (2000). Undergraduate student benefits from university recreation. Recreational Sports Journal, 25(1), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1123/rsj.25.1.25
  26. Hair, J. F., Black, W. C., Babin, B. J., & Anderson, R. E. (2014). Multivariate data analysis (7th ed.). Pearson Education.
  27. Hall, D. A. (2006). Participation in a campus recreation program and its effect on student retention. Recreational Sports Journal, 30(1), 40–45. https://doi.org/10.1123/rsj.30.1.40
  28. Hamaideh, S. (2010). Stressors and reactions to stressors among university students. International Journal of Social Psychiatry, 57(1), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1177/0020764010348442
  29. Hekim, Ö. (2022). Investigation of participation reasons and leisure constraints of university students in nature-based sporting leisure activities (Unpublished master’s thesis). Karamanoglu Mehmetbey University.
  30. Jackson, E. L. (2000). Will research on leisure constraints still be relevant in the twenty-first century? Journal of Leisure Research, 32(1), 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2000.11949887
  31. Jackson, E. L., Crawford, D. W., & Godbey, G. (1993). Negotiation of leisure constraints. Leisure Sciences, 15(1), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490409309513182
  32. Kara, F. M., Demirhan, E., Gürkan, R. K., & Karaca, G. (2025). The predictive power of leisure involvement of university students participating in campus recreation on their subjective vitality. Ekev Akademi Dergisi, 102, 316–326. https://doi.org/10.17753/sosekev.1602415
  33. Karadeniz, F., Müftüler, M., & Gülbeyaz, K. (2019). Investigation of attitudes and barriers of university students towards leisure activities: The case of Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University. Journal of Sports and Recreation Research, 1(2), 21–36.
  34. Karakaya, İ. (2012). Scientific research methods. Anı Publishing.
  35. Karaküçük, S. (1999). Recreation: Free time evaluation. Bağırgan Publishing.
  36. Karasar, N. (2020). Scientific research method: Concepts, principles, techniques. Nobelyum Publishing.
  37. Keltek, S., & Karaçar, E. (2025). Investigation of factors hindering and facilitating recreation activities of Sinop University staff. Journal of Gastronomy, Hospitality and Travel, 8(2), 421–435. https://doi.org/10.33083/joghat.2025.188
  38. Kocabıyık Önsoy, İ. (2019). Investigation of recreational tendencies and factors preventing participation in recreational activities of foreigners living in the Aegean region (Unpublished master’s thesis). Muğla Sıtkı Koçman University.
  39. Malinauskas, R., Dumciene, A., & Lapeniene, D. (2014). Social skills and life satisfaction of Lithuanian first- and senior-year university students. Social Behavior and Personality, 42(2), 285–293. https://doi.org/10.2224/sbp.2014.42.2.285
  40. Mirza Sert, E., & Onay, B. (2025). Classification of recreational needs of university students using the Kano model: The case of Ahmet Necdet Sezer Campus. Kent Akademisi, 18(2), 735–752. https://doi.org/10.35674/kent.1399821
  41. Nunnally, J. C., & Bernstein, I. H. (1994). Psychometric theory (3rd ed.). McGraw-Hill.
  42. Orhun, B. N., Altunöz, Ö., & Demir, İ. H. (2024). Recreation anxiety: A scale development study. Journal of Gastronomy, Hospitality and Travel, 7(2), 609–624. https://doi.org/10.33083/joghat.2024.133
  43. Orhun, B. N., Altunöz, Ö., & Yaylı, A. (2024). An examination of women’s participation in recreational activities from the perspective of gender roles. Journal of Gastronomy, Hospitality and Travel, 7(1), 176–190. https://doi.org/10.33083/joghat.2024.112
  44. Önal, L., & Biricik, Y. S. (2025). The role of campus recreation in the socio-cultural adaptation process. Journal of Physical Education and Sport Sciences, 19(1), 71–83. https://doi.org/10.61962/bsd.1615014
  45. Önder, S. (2003). A study on determining the recreational tendencies and demands of Selcuk University students. Selcuk University Journal of Agriculture Faculty, 17(32), 31–38.
  46. Önen, L. (2023). Investigation of factors preventing university students’ participation in recreational activities and their leisure motivations (Unpublished master’s thesis). Necmettin Erbakan University.
  47. Paksoy, M., Çalık, F., Yaşartürk, F., & Çimen, K. (2016). Factors affecting the participation of Abdullah Gul University students in recreation activities. International Journal of Science Culture and Sport, 4(Special Issue 1), 39–50. https://doi.org/10.14486/IntJSCS491
  48. Peker, H., Teke, C., Çakar, B., Kabadayı, Y., & Caner, N. (2023). The relationship between enjoyment of physical activity, intention to participate again, and happiness: The case of university students participating in campus recreation. International Journal of Current Educational Research, 9(2), 206–220. https://doi.org/10.61087/IntJCES.2023.8
  49. Powers, S. L., Trauntvein, N. E., Barcelona, R. J., & Hartman, C. L. (2019). Constraints and negotiations to student recreational sport center usage. Journal of Amateur Sport, 5(2), 18–38. https://doi.org/10.17161/jas.v5i2.8174
  50. Qian, X., Yarnal, C., & Almeida, D. (2014). Does leisure time moderate or mediate the effect of daily stress on positive affect? An examination using eight-day diary data. Journal of Leisure Research, 46(1), 106–124. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2014.11950314
  51. Romsa, G., & Hoffman, W. (1980). An application of non-participation data in recreation research: Testing the opportunity theory. Journal of Leisure Research, 12(4), 321–328. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1980.11969458
  52. Saleh, D., Camart, N., & Romo, L. (2017). Predictors of stress in college students. Frontiers in Psychology, 8, 1–8. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2017.00019
  53. Snodgrass, M. L., & Tinsley, C. E. (1990). Recreation and wellness: Identifying motivations for participation in recreational sports. Recreational Sports Journal, 15(1), 34–48. https://doi.org/10.1123/rsj.15.1.34
  54. Swanepoel, E., Surujlal, J., & Dhurup, M. (2015). Attitudes toward sport and physical activity, self-esteem, and life satisfaction relationships and variations in terms of gender: Perspectives from university students. African Journal for Physical, Health Education, Recreation and Dance, 1, 14–28.
  55. Şahin, E., Means, W. T., & Bayram, A. (2026). The relationship between campus recreation constraints and recreation anxiety among university students. Eurasian Journal of Sport Sciences and Education, 8(1), 50–59. https://doi.org/10.47778/ejsse.118
  56. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2013). Using multivariate statistics (6th ed.). Pearson.
  57. Turner, P. V. (1986). Campus: An American planning tradition. Landscape Journal, 5(1), 66–67. https://doi.org/10.3368/lj.5.1.66
  58. Ulutaş, A. E. (2019). The relationship between leisure and recreation and happiness (Unpublished master’s thesis). Gazi University.
  59. Uzun, S. (2022). A study on the use of spaces for recreational purposes: The case of Duzce University Konuralp Campus. Duzce University Journal of Science and Technology, 10(1), 483–496. https://doi.org/10.29130/dubited.844331
  60. Weinberg, R. S., & Gould, D. (2011). Foundations of sport and exercise psychology. Human Kinetics.
  61. Yılmaz, O., & Altunöz, Ö. (2025a). A bibliometric analysis of campus recreation within the scope of Web of Science. Tourism and Recreation, 7(1), 321–332. https://doi.org/10.53601/tourismandrecreation.1568719
  62. Yılmaz, O., & Altunöz, Ö. (2025b). Adapting the leisure constraints for campus recreation scale into Turkish culture: A validity and reliability study. GSI Journals Serie A: Advancements in Tourism, Recreation and Sports Sciences, 8(1), 32–53. https://doi.org/10.53353/atrss.1489640
  63. Yüksel, M. (2026). Evaluation of university students’ sports profiles and their opinions on sports facilities and activities: The case of Ordu University. Nevşehir Hacı Bektaş Veli University Journal of Social Sciences Institute, 16(1), 508–534. https://doi.org/10.30783/nevsosbilen.1827217