Content uploaded by Susan Houge Mackenzie
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Susan Houge Mackenzie on Feb 12, 2019
Content may be subject to copyright.
Full Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at
https://www.tandfonline.com/action/journalInformation?journalCode=rlst20
Leisure Studies
ISSN: 0261-4367 (Print) 1466-4496 (Online) Journal homepage: https://www.tandfonline.com/loi/rlst20
Adventure recreation and subjective well-being: a
conceptual framework
Susan Houge Mackenzie & Ken Hodge
To cite this article: Susan Houge Mackenzie & Ken Hodge (2019): Adventure
recreation and subjective well-being: a conceptual framework, Leisure Studies, DOI:
10.1080/02614367.2019.1577478
To link to this article: https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2019.1577478
Published online: 11 Feb 2019.
Submit your article to this journal
View Crossmark data
Adventure recreation and subjective well-being: a conceptual
framework
Susan Houge Mackenzie
a
and Ken Hodge
b
a
Department of Tourism, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand;
b
School of Physical Education, Sport, & Exercise
Sciences, University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
ABSTRACT
Despite the documented positive outcomes of adventure experiences,
subjective well-being (SWB) frameworks have been largely absent from
discourse and analyses in adventure studies. This conceptual paper pro-
poses a framework for understanding how adventure recreation experi-
ences promote eudaemonic SWB. In our framework, we propose that
adventure recreation fosters eudaemonic aspects of SWB by supporting
the satisfaction of basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence,
relatedness and beneficence. The framework also integrates ‘contact with
nature’as an important mechanism through which adventure recreation
fosters eudaemonic SWB. Analysis of research and practice across diverse
aspects of adventure recreation (leisure, tourism, and education contexts) is
used to support the proposed framework and to critically evaluate how
psychological models, such as self-determination theory (SDT)and SWB, can
advance theory and practice in adventure recreation. We conclude by
offering a number of suggestions for future research directions and practical
implications.
ARTICLE HISTORY
Received 1 July 2018
Accepted 28 January 2019
KEYWORDS
Self-determination theory;
basic psychological needs;
eudaimonia; positive
psychology; adventure
tourism; adventure
education
“We have discovered [a]. . . black box; we know [adventure ] works, but we don’t know why or how.”(Ewert,
1983, p. 27)
Outdoor adventure experiences have been shown to facilitate a range of positive affective and cognitive
outcomes, such as increased self-confidence, self-esteem, resilience, intrinsic motivation, enjoyment,
competence, relatedness, and autonomy, as well as personal transformations, well-being, and the
development of eco-centric perspectives (e.g., Brymer & Schweitzer, 2013;Ewert&Yoshino,2011;
Hattie, Marsh, Neill, & Richards, 1997; Scarf et al., 2018; Sheard & Golby, 2006;Sibthorp,Paisley,
Gookin, & Furman, 2008; Wang, Liu, & Kahlid, 2006). Adventure recreation has historically been
characterised as leisure with uncertainty and defined as physical activities utilising an interaction with
the natural environment that contains elements of real or apparent risk (Ewert & Hollenhorst, 1989).
Despite the range of benefits attributed to adventure experiences, the ‘black box’
1
issue persists in the
adventure literature (Shellman, 2011), while subjective well-being (SWB) frameworks and outcomes
remain largely absent from discourse and analyses in adventure studies (Durr, 2009;seeHouge
Mackenzie & Brymer, 2018;Lee&Ewert,2018 for exceptions).
Subjective well-being models describe well-being in terms of a range of feelings arising from what
people do and how they think and feel (Ryan & Huta, 2009). Positive feelings arising from leisure
practices such as adventure recreation include happiness, joy, contentment and excitement (i.e., hedonic
SWB; Newman, Tay, & Diener, 2014;Ryan&Deci,2001). Leisure practices can also provide a sense of
CONTACT Susan Houge Mackenzie susan.hougemackenzie@otago.ac.nz
Note: The first author’s surname is: Houge Mackenzie (no hyphen). Citations read: Houge Mackenzie, S.
LEISURE STUDIES
https://doi.org/10.1080/02614367.2019.1577478
© 2019 Informa UK Limited, trading as Taylor & Francis Group
purpose and meaningfulness (e.g., eudaemonic SWB; Ryan & Deci, 2001). In this article, we integrate
knowledge about the complexities of SWB as it relates to the leisure practice of adventure recreation.
A large volume of research has established links between (i) leisure and SWB (e.g., Newman et al.,
2014) and (ii) contact with nature and general well-being (e.g., Chawla, Keena, Pevec, & Stanley, 2014;
Frumpkin et al. 2017;Kaplan,1995). However, adventure recreation activities have not been examined
in great depth using SWB frameworks. Thus, there is a need for theoretical development both in terms of
(i) the psychological mechanisms through which adventure experiences can foster SWB, and (ii) how
encountering nature in adventure recreation may foster SWB.
Based on these gaps in the adventure recreation literature, we offer a conceptual framework that
synthesises recent advances in SWB literature and links these to adventure recreation processes and
outcomes. In particular, we advocate for integrating a leading psychological theory of motivation,
development, and well-being (self-determination theory: SDT, Ryan & Deci, 2017), to the study of
adventure recreation. As self-determination theory explains the core elements of optimal functioning,
psychological health, well-being and life satisfaction, we believe that SDT can provide a robust
conceptual framework to help explain the adventure recreation ‘black box’. Considerable research
has shown strong positive relationships between SWB and SDT constructs (e.g., basic psychological
need satisfaction; autonomous motivation; autonomy-supportive social environments; see Ryan &
Deci, 2001,2017 for reviews). While SDT constructs relate to both hedonic SWB (e.g., Reis, Sheldon,
Gable, Roscoe, & Ryan, 2000) and eudaemonic SWB (e.g., Gagné, Ryan, & Bargmann, 2003), the
major focus of this article and our conceptual framework will be on eudaemonic aspects of SWB.
Our integrated conceptual framework will focus specifically on how adventure recreation can
foster eudaemonic SWB (e.g., purpose and meaning, life satisfaction) via the satisfaction of the
three basic psychological needs for autonomy, competence and relatedness detailed in SDT, as
well as the recently proposed fourth basic need for beneficence (Martela & Ryan, 2016; Martela,
Ryan, & Steger, 2018). Autonomy is defined as having an authentic sense of self-direction and
volition and being the perceived origin of one’s own behaviour (Ryan & Deci, 2017). Competence
refers to individuals feeling effective in their ongoing interactions with their environment and
experiencing opportunities to exercise and express their capacities. Relatedness refers to feeling
connected to others, caring about and being cared for by others, and having a sense of belonging
both with other individuals and with one’s community. Beneficence is characterised by feeling
that one has a positive impact on the lives of other people and engaging in prosocial behaviour
(Martela et al., 2018). When these basic psychological needs are satisfied, people experience
positive psychological development and optimal psychological well-being (Ryan & Deci, 2017).
Our conceptual framework will also identify and differentiate amongst three proposed ele-
ments of eudaemonia (i.e., coherence, purpose, significance; Martela & Steger, 2016), that may be
supported when adventure recreation experiences satisfy basic psychological needs. Furthermore,
we will critique the absence of ‘nature’in models of SWB, with a focus on adventure recreation
findings that link nature with SWB. Thus, the purpose of this article is to propose a conceptual
framework for understanding the process of how adventure recreation fosters eudaemonic aspects
of SWB by integrating contact with nature alongside the satisfaction of the basic psychological
needs for autonomy, competence, relatedness and beneficence.
Review of literature
Setting the scene: What is adventure recreation?
Although the term ‘adventure’remains contested in academic literature and popular usage, novelty,
uncertainty, physical activity, development of personal skills, pleasurable kinaesthetic awareness of
bodily sensations, and voluntary seeking of physical and mental challenges (often framed as ‘risk’)in
natural environments have been cited as key components (e.g., ATTA, 2016; Kerr & Houge Mackenzie,
2012; Swarbrooke, Beard, Leckie, & Pomfret, 2003). Ewert and Hollenhorst (1989, p. 125) defined
2S. HOUGE MACKENZIE AND K. HODGE
adventure recreation as ‘a variety of self-initiated activities utilising an interaction with the natural
environment, that contain elements of real or apparent danger, in which the outcome, while uncertain,
can be influenced by the participant and circumstance.’Building on these parameters, we define
adventure recreation as self-initiated, nature-based physical activities that generate heightened bodily
sensations and require skill development to manage unique perceived and objective risks. In addition to
being voluntary and nature-based, this definition distinguishes adventure activities from those encoun-
tered in modern urban lifestyles on the basis that they involve unique bodily sensations, perceived and
objective risks, and skill sets, rather than necessarily involving heightened risks relative to everyday life
(e.g., Beedie & Bourne, 2005). While ‘extreme’activities, in which mismanaged mistakes will likely result
in death (e.g., BASE jumping; Brymer & Schweitzer, 2013), occupy a small proportion of adventure
recreation, our definition encompasses a wider scope of adventure pursuits. For instance, trekking/
hiking, mountainbiking, and kayaking are increasingly accessible to broader populations at a range of
skill levels (see Pomfret, 2006 for a catalogue of contemporary adventure). This approach also includes
a broad range of adventure contexts, such as outdoor recreation, outdoor education, adventure tourism,
which focus on challenges resulting from interactions with the natural environment.
While traditional perspectives of adventure have emphasised risk-seeking (e.g., Lyng, 2005),
our conceptualisation reflects contemporary scholarship that questions the role of risk-seeking in
adventure and highlights potentially negative outcomes that can accompany risk-focused models
(e.g., Brown, 2009). Scholars have called for academics, practitioners and policymakers to con-
ceptualise adventure in more inclusive ways that benefit a diversity of participants (e.g., Clough,
Houge Mackenzie, Mallabon, & Brymer, 2016). Consequently, we argue that focusing on what
makes adventure recreation unique and distinct from ‘normal modern life’, rather than more risky
than everyday activities, may be a more productive approach. Accordingly, our framework shifts
the emphasis from risk to the importance of unique challenges posed by adventure recreation.
Progress in adventure studies
In traditional risk-focused models of adventure, participants have often been portrayed as selfish
adrenaline-seekers or deviant hedonists seeking to conquer nature (e.g., Allman, Mittlestaedt,
Martin, & Goldenberg, 2009). In contrast, recent investigations of adventure recreation suggest
that eudaemonic participation motives such as goal achievement and social connections, may play
a larger role than hedonic motives such as thrill-seeking. Documented eudaemonic outcomes of
adventure include: positive life transformations, enhanced quality of life, emotional regulation,
development of emotional agency in interpersonal relationships, goal achievement, social connec-
tions, and pushing personal boundaries (e.g., Brymer & Schweitzer, 2013; Lee & Ewert, 2018).
In order to develop more robust, integrated models of adventure participation that can inform
policy and practice, we need to first identify the key psychological mechanisms that underpin diverse
adventure outcomes. While multiple studies have identified the benefits of adventure (e.g., Hattie
et al., 1997;Wangetal.,2006), the mechanisms through which these benefits are realised remain
contested. In essence, scholars and practitioners know it works, but not necessarily why it works.
Researchers have argued that these issues are rooted in theoretical models and practices that are rarely
questioned in adventure literature (Brown, 2009).
Over the past decade, some researchers seeking to address this ‘black box’issue have integrated
mainstream psychological models to inform research and evaluation. For instance, adventure
education researchers have employed positive psychology frameworks and measures to assess
adventure programmes (e.g., Houge Mackenzie, Son, & Hollenhorst, 2014; Scarf et al., 2018;
Sibthorp et al., 2008). Building on this progress in adventure studies, the following sections
explore different approaches to examining well-being from both hedonic and eudaemonic per-
spectives. This exploration is followed by a discussion of how adventure may support eudaemonic
SWB through the mechanism of basic psychological need satisfaction.
LEISURE STUDIES 3
Progress in well-being research
From the outset, it is important to situate ‘well-being’in relation to similar, yet distinct, concepts.
Well-being is generally used in reference to individuals, whereas ‘quality of life’refers to com-
munities or societies (Gasper, 2010). As Gasper (2010) suggests, well-being is more relevant to
discussions of actual experiences and evaluations of specific facets of life, whereas the quality of
life may be more relevant holistic evaluations of life or society. While there are overlaps in these
approaches, the former (well-being) is rooted in psychological approaches, whereas the latter
(quality of life) is more aligned with sociological and social policy approaches. The current
discussion of adventure recreation experiences is grounded in psychological approaches to well-
being.
Historically, well-being has been operationalised in multiple ways across various disciplines.
One dominant approach has emphasised the objective conditions that allow individuals to thrive.
This approach, which presumes that human well-being is predicated on increasing conditions
such as income, life expectancy, and education (e.g., UN Human Development Index), has played
a significant role in shaping public policy at the global level (Dean, 2009). In contrast to this
objective approach, economic approaches such as ‘preference satisfaction’suggest that well-being
is enhanced by enabling people to satisfy their preferences to the greatest degree possible,
primarily through increased income (e.g., Benjamin, Heffetz, Kimball, & Szembrot, 2014). This
approach is reflected in public policies and measures focused on increasing gross domestic
product (GDP) as an indicator of well-being.
In contrast to these approaches, subjective well-being (SWB) perspectives focus to how people
feel (over the short and long term) as a result of their actions and situations (e.g., Kahneman,
Diener, & Schwarz, 1999). Scholars such as Testoni, Mansfield, and Dolan (2018) have critiqued
the shortcomings of objective and preference satisfaction perspectives and argued that SWB
approaches, which focus on the consequences of experiences on individuals’mental states, offer
distinct advantages. Specifically, they argue that ‘of all accounts of well-being, only SWB can
encapsulate whether and how much sport (or anything else) really matters to people’(Testoni
et al., 2018, p. 818). Although it has been nearly two decades since Diener (2000) suggested using
SWB as an index of national well-being, aside from the noteworthy exception to Bhutan, it is only
recently that SWB approaches has become more globally embraced. For example, the United
Nations now measures SWB across 156 countries and many nations have integrated SWB
measures into national statistics (e.g., Fujiwara & Campbell, 2011; Stats NZ, 2018). Given the
wider context of these theoretical and policy developments, the current paper focuses specifically
on SWB outcomes of adventure recreation experiences.
Subjective well-being: hedonic and eudaimonia perspectives
Within SWB approaches, the complex and symbiotic nature of hedonic and eudaemonic elements
has been vigorously debated (e.g., Huta & Waterman, 2014). The primary difference is that
hedonia is a more immediate, affective experience, whereas eudaemonia is characterised as ‘a
good and fulfilling way of life’focused on meaning and purpose (Ryan & Martela, 2016, p. 109). In
an effort to address tensions regarding the primacy of hedonic versus eudaemonic approaches to
well-being, Ryan and Deci (2001) described well-being as ‘a multidimensional phenomenon that
includes aspects of both the hedonic and eudaemonic conceptions of well-being’(p.148).
Eudaemonia was the central focus of Ryff’s(1989) foundational model of psychological well-being
that integrated six psychological dimensions: autonomy, environmental mastery, personal growth, positive
relations with others, purpose in life,andself-acceptance.Ryffandothers(e.g.,Lü,Wang,Liu,&Zhang,
2014) have since highlighted the role of resilience in eudaemonic approaches to well-being. Resilience, the
ability to ‘maintain or regain well-being in the face of adversity’(Ryff,2013,p.10),canpredictimportant
well-being outcomes, such as life satisfaction and affective SWB (Bajaj & Pande, 2016). While the
pathways between resilience and well-being remain contested, some research suggests that increases in
4S. HOUGE MACKENZIE AND K. HODGE
resilience, particularly in adventure contexts, can be attributed to an enhanced sense of belonging (Scarf
et al., 2017) or the basic psychological need for relatedness,asdiscussedbelow.
While Ryff’s(2013) model focuses on eudaemonic elements, scholars also suggest that hedonia
plays an important role in well-being. For example, Denier’s tripartite model posits that SWB
represents high levels of life satisfaction and positive emotions, and low levels of negative
emotions (Diener, Oshi, & Lucas, 2009). Diener et al. define SWB as ‘a person’s cognitive and
affective evaluations of his or her life as a whole’(p. 167). Although definitions and measures of
SWB remain contested, there is empirical support for the role of hedonic (e.g., positive and
negative affect) and eudaemonic elements (e.g., life satisfaction, meaning) (e.g., Diener et al., 2009;
Huta & Waterman, 2014).
Although the purpose of adventure has often been framed in hedonic terms, such as oppor-
tunities for positive emotions (e.g., excitement) and peak or flow experiences (Houge Mackenzie,
Hodge, & Boyes, 2011), research indicates that eudaemonic aspect of well-being may play a larger
role in longer-term SWB and meaningfulness in life. For instance, in a series of three studies
Martela et al. (2018) found that positive affect may only directly influence SWB across shorter
time frames (e.g., a single day) and that even in these instances, basic psychological needs
predicted greater variance in measures of life satisfaction. A recent attempt to model the relation-
ship between leisure and SWB also highlighted the importance of eudaemonic elements. Based on
a meta-analysis of 363 studies, Newman et al. (2014) proposed a conceptual model of leisure that
influences SWB through the psychological mechanisms of detachment-recovery, autonomy,
mastery, meaning, and affiliation (DRAMMA). The authors concluded that enhanced SWB in
leisure leads to enhanced global SWB through a bottom-up theory of SWB. Based on this
literature, we argue that drawing upon established psychological theories have the potential to
improve our understanding of the relationship between adventure and SWB, particularly in terms
of how adventure may foster the eudaemonic components of SWB.
Subjective well-being via basic psychological need satisfaction
A leading model of eudaemonia that has the potential to provide an organising framework for adventure
experiences is a basic psychological needs theory. This sub-theory of self-determination theory posits
that satisfying basic psychological needs is vital for psychological growth (e.g., intrinsic motivation),
well-being (e.g., life satisfaction; psychological health), and subjective vitality (Ryan & Deci, 2017).
A large volume of evidence demonstrates how satisfying these needs facilitates psychological well-being
(see Ryan & Deci, 2017 for a review), and a smaller body of research demonstrates how ill-being results
when these needs are thwarted or frustrated (e.g., Vansteenkiste & Ryan, 2013).
Within the basic needs framework, Martela et al. (2018) recently distinguished between those basic
psychological needs that support self-expression (autonomy and competence) and those that support
self-transcendence (relatedness and beneficence). Autonomy satisfaction results from the experience of
volition or free will, in one’s behaviour, whereas autonomy is thwarted when an individual feels externally
controlled (Ryan & Deci, 2001). Competence satisfaction results from feeling capable of reaching
personally determined goals, whereas competence is thwarted by doubts about one’s capabilities.
Relatedness satisfaction results from feeling deeply connected to important others, whereas relatedness
is thwarted by feeling disconnected or excluded from others. Considerable research has demonstrated
that satisfying these psychological needs for self-expression and self-transcendence predicts differences in
well-being at (a) the level of daily well-being (Reis et al., 2000) and (b) the overall life satisfaction levels
(Ryan & Huta, 2009). The influence of basic psychological needs on well-being has been documented
across various life domains, such as work (Van Den Broeck, Vansteenkiste, De Witte, Soenens, & Lens,
2010); education (Mouratidis, Vansteenkiste, Sideridis, & Lens, 2011), sport (Stenling & Tafvelin, 2014),
and adventure education (Scarf et al., 2018); and across diverse cultural samples (e.g., Chen et al., 2015).
Recently, beneficence has been proposed as a potential fourth basic psychological need that
relates to self-transcendence. Based on findings that prosocial behaviours and giving to others
LEISURE STUDIES 5
support SWB, Martela and Ryan (2016) assessed whether ‘acting benevolently’directly contrib-
uted to well-being or whether this effect was mediated by satisfying needs for autonomy,
competence or relatedness. In a series of five studies, they found that while the three basic
needs explained some of the variances, beneficence satisfaction predicted unique variance in
eudaemonic well-being. These findings supported eudaemonic notions that well-being is
enhanced by acting in ways that benefit others, even in the absence of direct contact with
beneficiaries. As empirical data on the unique contributions of beneficence to well-being is sparse,
further research is needed to fully explore this relationship.
Adventure, psychological need satisfaction and eudaemonia
Although the SDT model of basic psychological needs has not been widely used to guide
adventure studies (exceptions include Houge Mackenzie et al., 2014; Lloyd & Little, 2010;
MacGregor, Woodman, & Hardy, 2014; Scarf et al., 2018; Sibthorp et al., 2008), numerous studies
have linked enhanced autonomy, competence, and/or relatedness with adventure recreation
activities. Using an SDT framework, MacGregor et al. (2014) found that, compared to a control
group, climbers reported significantly higher autonomy, competence and relatedness in daily life
and concluded that ‘regular climbing provides participants with an agentic emotional experience
that then benefits their everyday functioning; such benefits are not derived from other (low-risk)
activities’(p.175). Studies from recreation and tourism have supported the role of autonomy in
particular in relation to climbing motives and benefits (e.g., Pomfret, 2006). In qualitative studies
examining the quality of life and well-being benefits of adventure recreation for women, Lloyd
and Little (2005,2010) argued that well-being can be enhanced by activities that support
autonomy, competence and relatedness. Studies by Sibthorp et al. (e.g., 2008) and Wurdinger
and Paxton (2003) have repeatedly highlighted the critical importance of autonomy in fostering
programme outcomes across a range of participants in therapeutic, educational and recreational
adventure contexts.
In addition to autonomy, the importance of competence and relatedness are enduring themes in
adventure recreation studies. The perceived challenges in adventure recreation have been shown to
have positively influenced optimal experiences and psychological well-being (e.g., Houge Mackenzie
et al., 2011; Tsaur, Lin, & Cheng, 2015). Amongst adolescents, extended adventure recreation
experiences were shown to support identity development by building competence and supportive
relationships (Duerden, Taniguchi, & Widmer, 2012). Adventure education with adolescent girls
has also enhanced their social connectedness and self-efficacy in leadership competencies
(Richmond, Sibthorp, Gookin, Annarella, & Ferri, 2018). Building competence and relationships
with others have been explicitly identified as motives for participating in adventure recreation
events (Lynch & Dibben, 2016). In research with over 801 participants across four adventure
activities (rock climbing, whitewater kayaking, sea kayaking, canoeing), social motives emerged as
the best predictor of group membership (Ewert, Gilbertson, Luo, & Voight, 2013). In summary, the
literature demonstrates strong support for the role of autonomy, competence, and relatedness in
fostering positive outcomes associated with adventure recreation.
Although we are not aware of any studies investigating the proposed psychological need for
beneficence in relation to adventure recreation participation, some research indirectly supports this
proposed relationship. Research with youth has identified that adventure recreation can diminish
antisocial behaviours and encourage adoption of prosocial behaviours, a key aspect of beneficence
(e.g., Walsh & Aubry, 2007). Notwithstanding, much of this research is focused on remedying
problematic social behaviours. Given the importance of instructor and/or peer support in developing
skills and providing adventure recreation opportunities, we argue that the role of beneficence in
fostering well-being for adventure participants is a promising avenue requiring further attention.
6S. HOUGE MACKENZIE AND K. HODGE
Contact with nature and subjective well-being
In addition to the proposed importance of basic psychological need satisfaction in adventure
recreation experiences, the ‘contact with nature’inherent in adventure recreation may independently
contribute to well-being outcomes. While Ryan et al. (2010) have shown that nature increases
subjective vitality (hedonic SWB), the role of nature in eudaemonic SWB has not been explicitly
explored. Research suggests that humans fundamentally rely on the natural world to maintain well-
being and that adventurous leisure can improve participants’connections to nature (Brymer,
Cuddihy, & Sharma-Brymer, 2010). Beyond the benefits of adventure resulting from encountering
risk and challenge or the social environment, there appear to be additional well-being benefits that
may accrue directly from being in natural environments. For example, ‘green exercise’,exercise
performed either in nature or with views of nature, has been shown to increase well-being beyond the
benefits reaped by the exercise itself (Pretty, Peacock, Sellens, & Griffin, 2005). Research has
documented numerous benefits of both vigorous (e.g., green exercise, outdoor adventure) and less
active outdoor leisure (e.g., Frumkin et al., 2017; Mutz & Müller, 2016). Nature appears to play an
important role in physical and mental recovery, resilience, and well-being. Access to green space not
only reduces stress, increases physical activity, and prevents illness, it can also promote flourishing
through increased social capital, family connections, positive emotions, and an improved sense of
well-being (e.g., Frumkin et al., 2017; Dolan & Testoni, 2018).
The importance of nature to well-being and flourishing has been attributed to the restoration
of attention following exposure to nature (Kaplan, 1995), and some have argued that this
relationship may have a biological basis. For instance, brain wave patterns associated with
meditative calm have been documented during contact with nature (Aspinall, Mavros, Coyne,
& Roe, 2013). Drawing on Frederickson’s(2001)‘broaden and build’theory of positive emotions,
Aspinall et al. examined cortical correlates of emotional states in green and urban spaces.
Consistent with attention restoration theories, these authors found cortical evidence of lower
frustration, engagement, arousal, and higher meditation when moving in green spaces. As a result,
the authors recommended creating green spaces in urban areas to enhance positive emotional
responses and positive mood. Chawla et al. (2014) also examined how nature helps children
physically survive and psychologically thrive. Many of the benefits identified by Chawla et al.
resonate with SWB and SDT constructs such as relatedness, autonomy, competence, vitality,
creativity, and positive emotions. Due to the apparent role that nature plays in human health
and flourishing, and the integral role that nature plays in adventure recreation, we argue that
understanding how contact with nature may complement basic psychological need satisfaction
should receive increased attention in adventure research.
Operationalising eudaemonic SWB: Coherence, purpose, and significance in life
Eudaemonia is often referred to as leading a meaningful life and recent research has robustly
demonstrated that meaning in life plays an important role in well-being (see Steger, 2009 for
review). However, scholars have increasingly debated the unidimensional nature of research on
eudaemonia as meaning and have proposed that meaning has specific, distinctive components.
Drawing on theoretical developments in psychological research and philosophy, Martel and Steger
(2016) make a convincing case for distinguishing between three core components for meaning in
life: coherence, purpose and significance. These three components are used in our conceptual
framework to provide an enhanced means of operationalising and testing eudaemonic SWB
outcomes. Briefly, coherence is a cognitive assessment of whether one’s life makes sense in
terms of following predictable patterns and structures. The purpose is motivational as it entails
having clear goals, aims and directions in one’s life. The significance is evaluative as it entails
feeling that one’s life has value, worth and importance. These three facets are also proposed to be
connected to the overall meaning in life (Martel & Steger, 2016). Although much of the research
on eudaemonia has been concerned with what leads to a life worth living (antecedents), these
LEISURE STUDIES 7
three facets are proposed to encompass the core elements of experiencing a meaningful life.
Therefore, we have operationalised eudaemonic SWB in these specific terms as they provide
a clear means for measuring important SWB outcomes.
A conceptual framework for adventure recreation and eudaemonic SWB
Inordertobetterintegrateexistingfindings and guide future research, we propose a conceptual
framework that integrates adventure recreation, SDT basic psychological needs, and eudaemonic
SWB (see Figure 1). This integrated conceptual framework characterises eudaemonic SWB as occurring
via satisfaction of the four basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, relatedness and
beneficence, and contact with nature. Such SWB development begins with participation in an adventure
experience (left side of Figure 1). According to the framework, the adventure recreation experience will
only be successful in satisfying the four basic psychological needs if the motivational climate created and
nurtured by the leaders and/or peers is need-supportive. A need-supportive motivational climate is
created when a participant in an adventure experience is provided with choice and a rationale for tasks,
their feelings are acknowledged, opportunities to show initiative and independent work are provided,
participants are given non-controlling competence feedback, and the use of guilt-inducing criticism and
overt control is avoided by leaders (Mageau & Vallerand, 2003). Peer participants influence the creation
of need-supportive motivational climates through similar means. If this need-supportive climate is
created, then participants will likely report greater satisfaction of their basic psychological needs; the
more these needs are satisfied, the more they become internalised by participants. Finally, the greater the
level of need satisfaction and internalisation, the greater the likelihood that participants will report high
levels of key psychological well-being markers, such as meaning, purpose, significance and eudaemonic
SWB (e.g., Ryan & Deci, 2017)(rightsideofFigure 1).
Future research directions and implications for theory
The proposed conceptual framework has a range of implications for advancing theory and research.
This model supports recent calls to explore how adventure can enhance health and well-being in the
Eudaimonic SWB
Basic Psychological Needs
Adventure Experience
•Challenge
•Unique perceived
and/or objective risks
•Choice
•Social interactions
•Need-supportive
motivational climate
•Natural environment
•Physical activity
•Unique bodily
sensations
Self-Expression:
•Autonomy
•Competence
Self-Transcendence:
•Relatedness
•Beneficence
Contact with nature
•Life Satisfaction
•Meaning:
•Coherence
•Purpose
•Significance
Figure 1. A conceptual framework of how adventure recreation experiences enhance eudaemonic SWB via basic psychological
need satisfaction and nature contact.
8S. HOUGE MACKENZIE AND K. HODGE
general population (Clough et al., 2016). Although adventure has not traditionally been viewed as
a widely accessible alternative to traditional physical activity (e.g., team sport, exercise), frameworks
that explain how adventure supports eudaemonic SWB can foster more health and well-being oriented
approaches to adventure recreation. This shift in perspective has implications for public policy (e.g.,
provision of adventure opportunities for youth and general populations) and for practitioners who
design and deliver adventure experiences.
Future research employing longitudinal designs is necessary in order to directly examine the
consequences of adventure participation and need satisfaction for SWB development.
Longitudinal designs might include studies that experimentally examine the efficacy of SDT-
based interventions aimed at promoting need satisfaction and SWB development in adventure
contexts. Interventions should be designed with need-supportive leadership strategies to promote
need satisfaction, which, in turn, should increase SWB development via adventure recreation.
Experimentally examining SDT-based interventions aimed at facilitating SWB development would
also allow researchers to determine whether the relationships proposed in this conceptual frame-
work are indeed causal, as well as expanding current understandings of how changes in need
satisfaction/frustration predict changes in SWB. Researchers should also examine these relation-
ships at the event or daily levels and more general levels to identify whether or not relationships
are influenced by temporal elements. Further, this research should consider whether ‘balanced’
satisfaction of all four basic psychological needs is important to eudaemonic SWB in adventure
contexts (e.g., Sheldon & Hilpert, 2012). Future investigations should evaluate these proposed
relationships across a diverse range of adventure experiences (e.g., individual or group; land or
water-based; short or extended), and age cohorts (e.g., adolescents, older adults).
Adventure research has often been atheoretical and/or employed descriptive or correlational
designs. Seldom have participants or programmes been randomly assigned to conditions, and
control or placebo control groups employed, to examine SWB outcomes of adventure experiences.
While causal inference research designs can be difficult to conduct, they should not be avoided
because of their logistical difficulties (e.g., Shadish, Cook, & Campbell, 2002). To address the need
for theoretically driven causal inference adventure research, we offer this conceptual model of
adventure recreation, need satisfaction and SWB as a potential guiding framework.
Potential research designs
Researchers can employ a range of research designs beyond randomised control trials to examine
causal relationships between adventure, contact with nature, and need satisfaction on SWB. For
example, regression discontinuity designs can be used to make causal inferences when random
assignment is not practical or ethical (Lesik, 2006), while interrupted time-series designs, within-
study comparisons, success case method designs with a time-series element and qualitative impact
on analyses offer alternative research design options (Coryn, Schroter, & Hanssen, 2009; Mohr,
1999; Scriven, 2008; Shadish et al., 2002). Researchers could also conduct experimental interven-
tions designed to promote SWB via adventure experiences (e.g., via increasing need-supportive
leadership). This research could compare data across multiple informants (e.g., leader, teacher,
parent, co-worker, peer ratings of behaviours), direct behavioural observations of SWB outcomes,
and participant self-reports. Qualitative and case study research is also needed to examine, in
depth, the important role that psychological need satisfaction and nature contact appears to play
in facilitating SWB via adventure.
Potential measurement issues
One advantage of incorporating SDT principles into a conceptual framework of adventure (Figure 1),
is the ability to accurately measure (a) need-supportive motivational climates; (b) psychological need
satisfaction; and (c) SWB. Psychometrically valid and reliable measures of psychological need
satisfaction exist for diverse life domains, such as (i) health (Williams, Cox, Kouides, & Deci, 1999),
(ii) sport (Ng, Lonsdale, & Hodge, 2011), and (iii) life in general (Kashdan, Julian, Merritt, & Uswatte,
LEISURE STUDIES 9
2006). Martela and Ryan (2016) recently developed a four-item measure of beneficence satisfaction
that could be used to measure the satisfaction of this need. Psychometrically valid and reliable
measures of eudaemonic and hedonic SWB are also abundant (e.g., Satisfaction with Life Scale,
Diener, Emmons, Larsen, & Griffin, 1985).
To better explain how social-contextual factors influence need-satisfaction and need-frustration,
researchers should consider the extent to which all four basic psychological needs are satisfied/thwarted
by behaviours of adventure recreation leaders and peers. There is evidence from the sports domain that
unique variance in need satisfaction may be explained by teammate motivational climate (cf. peers)
beyond the variance explained by the coach motivational climate (cf. adventure leaders) (Hodge &
Gucciardi, 2015). Until recently, SDT researchers have characterised social-contextual factors in terms
of: (a) autonomy-support, (b) effectance-support (degree to which competence is supported), and (c)
relational-support (Ryan & Deci, 2017). With the recent proposition of a fourth psychological need,
future research will also need to assess beneficence and beneficence-support. To assess social-contextual
factors, future research could employ the Interpersonal Behaviours Questionnaire (IBQ; Rocchi,
Pelletier, Cheung, Baxter, & Beaudry, 2017), which assesses need-support and need-thwarting for
autonomy, competence and relatedness; however, an additional measure of beneficence-support/thwart-
ing would need to be developed.
Implications for practice
We also offer our conceptual framework as a basis for theoretically informed best practice
guidelines to support SWB across a range of adventure contexts. With respect to creating a need-
supportive motivational climate, there are numerous practical examples of leadership strategies
from educational psychology (e.g., Cheon, Reeve, & Ntoumanis, 2018) and coaching literature
(e.g., Mageau & Vallerand, 2003). Domains that may benefit from purposefully designed adven-
ture experiences that support basic psychological needs and enhance SWB include: (i) public
schools and school policy; (ii) urban and community programme planning; (iii) public health
policy; and (iv) adventure tourism.
Public schools and school policy
As schools have been identified as ‘the a priori institutions that can serve as the vehicles for [optimal
human] development’(Linley, Joseph, Harrington, & Wood, 2006, p. 10), public education settings
may be ideal venues for integrating curricula that use adventure recreation to enhance SWB.
Identifying opportunities to integrate adventure in schools, and other public well-being services,
may open creative new avenues for translating principles of SWB intosocial action. Including outdoor
adventure in social policy and public school curriculum would increase accessibility to these pro-
grammes and provide increased widespread well-being benefits (e.g., Mutz & Müller, 2016).
Urban and community programme planning
Using psychological models to understand adventure has the potential to facilitate a more diverse
range of well-being promotion options for individuals and communities. Recognising expanded
opportunities for interventions may help shape public policy, urban planning, and community
environments. Potential initiatives include developing natural spaces in urban areas that are
conducive to self-directed adventure activities for a range of skill levels and creating ‘community
adventure’programs (cf. Molix & Nichols, 2013) that foster basic need satisfaction through
adventure opportunities. In order to effectively promote well-being across communities through
the adventure, initiatives should be widely accessible for community members of all ages and
demographics and structured around key eudaemonic pillars of well-being. For example, explora-
tory research supports the value of adventure for elderly adults across a range of well-being
domains (e.g., physical, social, cognitive; Boyes, 2009). Applying SDT principles to adventure
10 S. HOUGE MACKENZIE AND K. HODGE
initiatives for the wider public may provide a novel avenue for enhancing community well-being
across a range of life stages.
Public health policy
Measures of SWB are increasingly being used at national and global levels to develop policies and
evaluate social outcomes. Diener (2000) argued that SWB should be of interest to policymakers
not only because of its ‘inherent value’, but also because individual SWB provides broader social
benefits. Well-being is increasingly used as an important measure of thriving alongside economic
outputs, as epitomised by Bhutan’s Gross National Happiness survey used to assess national well-
being. Global recognition of SWB indicators provides adventures researchers with a means to
articulate the practical applications of their research for broader audiences in relation to public
health and well-being.
Adventure tourism
Our conceptual framework has a number of practical implications for adventure tourism guides
and operators. This model can help operators purposefully design adventure experiences to meet
increasing tourist demands for eudaemonic experiences that provide a sense of well-being and
meaning alongside hedonic demands for fun and excitement (e.g., Swarbrooke et al., 2003). The
integrated SDT and SWB framework provides direct implications for designing adventure experi-
ences, which may also translate into competitive points of difference and novel marketing
strategies. For example, expanding beyond risk or thrill to focus on supporting basic needs and
motivational climates may have direct implications for itineraries (e.g., activities, locations) and
guides-client interactions. This framework also has important implications for guide training and
development programmes in relation to leadership and communication skills. Refocusing the
aims of adventure tours to include basic psychological need satisfaction and SWB outcomes has
the potential to enhance the quality and safety of tours, expand opportunities for developing new
adventure experiences, and offer novel means of assessing client experiences and satisfaction.
Conclusion
Reframing adventure in terms of satisfying psychological needs and SWB outcomes allows us to re-
examine the role that adventure can play in enhancing eudaemonic well-being for individuals and
communities. Developing shared models, concepts and language that links adventure to key indica-
tors of well-being, such as meaning, autonomy, competence, or relatedness, may also promote greater
acceptance of these activities as mainstream, health-promoting leisure pursuits. Using this framework
may also improve the quality of individual and group adventure experiences across recreation,
education and tourism contexts by providing specific well-being principles that can be translated
into practice (see practical recommendations above). This shift may increase the public’sperceived
value of adventure recreation in quality of life; provide public health, education, and recreation
practitioners with a broader range of strategies to enhance well-being; support adventure researchers
seeking to advance beyond the constraints of a ‘niche’field; and encourage policymakers and funding
bodies to broaden their notions of life-enhancing leisure.
Despite shared values and objectives that include understanding hedonic and eudaemonic well-
being, psychologists and adventure researchers have remained largely isolated from one another.
Integrating these disparate yet complementary areas of research would yield great benefits. This
conceptual exploration has synthesised and integrated diverse areas of existing knowledge from
psychology and adventure studies to illustrate promising new directions in research and practice.
These integrations have the potential to transform our understanding of how adventure can
promote optimal functioning for individuals and communities.
LEISURE STUDIES 11
Note
1. The ‘black box’issue, identified over 30 years ago (Ewert, 1983; Shellman, 2011), refers to critiques that
positive outcomes are frequently reported in studies of adventure recreation and education, but these are
seldom accompanied by robust theoretical explanations of how or why these outcomes occurred. Thus,
scholars have frequently called for improved theoretical models of what happens during adventure experi-
ences (i.e., in the ‘black box’) to foster positive outcomes.
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Patrick Boudreau (PhD candidate, University of Otago) for his valuable feedback
during the development of this paper.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes on contributors
Susan Houge Mackenzie is a Lecturer in the Tourism Department, School of Business, at the University of Otago,
New Zealand (NZ). She primarily investigates links between adventure and well-being across tourism, recreation,
and education contexts using psychological frameworks such as self-determination theory, reversal theory, and flow
theory. This research is informed by her former career as an adventure guide. Recent projects have focused on
outdoor adventure and well-being for tourists, guides, and host communities, and using adventure education to
promote engagement in physical activity and science education. She has provided consulting for government and
tourism agencies, the New Zealand riverboarding industry, the History Channel, and the United States Forest
Service, and currently serves as an Associate Editor for two journals focused on adventure education and outdoor
recreation.
Ken Hodge is a Professor in sport and exercise psychology at the School of Physical Education, Sport & Exercise
Sciences, University of Otago, New Zealand (NZ). His research focuses primarily on the psycho-social effects of
participation in sport. In particular, he has investigated issues such as life skill development through sport, self-
determined motivation in sport, sport commitment, prosocial and antisocial behaviour in sport, athlete burnout,
and athlete engagement. He is a former Associate Editor for theJournal of Applied Sport Psychology; and currently
serves on the Editorial Boards forThe Sport Psychologist,Journal of Applied Sport Psychology, Sport, Exercise &
Performance Psychology, andPsychology of Sport & Exercise.
ORCID
Susan Houge Mackenzie http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5660-6325
References
Adventure Travel and Tourism Association (ATTA). (2016). Adventure travel guide qualifications and performance
standard –III. Definitions. Retrieved from http://www.adventuretravel.biz/education/adventure-edu/blog/adven
ture-travel-guide-qualifications-performance-standard-iii-definitions/
Allman, T. L., Mittlestaedt, R. D., Martin, B., & Goldenberg, M. (2009). Exploring the motivations of
BASE-jumpers: Extreme sport enthusiasts. Journal of Sport & Tourism,14, 229–247.
Aspinall, P., Mavros, P., Coyne, R., & Roe, J. (2013). The urban brain: Analysing outdoor physical activity with
mobile EEG. British Journal of Sports Medicine,49, 272–276.
Bajaj, B., & Pande, N. (2016). Mediating role of resilience in the impact of mindfulness on life satisfaction and affect
as indices of subjective well-being. Personality and Individual Differences,93,63–67.
Beedie, P., & Bourne, G. (2005). Media constructions of risk: A case study of the Stainforth Beck incident. Journal of
Risk Research,8(4), 331–339.
Benjamin, D. J., Heffetz, O., Kimball, M. S., & Szembrot, N. (2014). Beyond happiness and satisfaction: Toward
well-being indices based on stated preference. American Economic Review,104(9), 2698–2735.
12 S. HOUGE MACKENZIE AND K. HODGE
Boyes, M. (2009). Outdoor adventures for the third age. In B. Humberstone (Ed.), Third age and leisure: Research,
principles and practice (pp. 81–96). Eastbourne, UK: Leisure Studies Association.
Brown, M. (2009). Reconceptualising outdoor adventure education: Activity in search of an appropriate theory.
Australian Journal of Outdoor Education,13,3–13.
Brymer, E., Cuddihy, T. F., & Sharma-Brymer, V. (2010). The role of nature-based experiences in the development
and maintenance of wellness. Asia-Pacific Journal of Health, Sport & Physical Education,1(2), 21–28.
Brymer, E., & Schweitzer, R. (2013). Extreme sports are good for your health: A phenomenological understanding
of fear and anxiety in extreme sport. Journal of Health Psychology,18(4), 477–487.
Chawla, L., Keena, K., Pevec, I., & Stanley, E. (2014). Green schoolyards as havens from stress and resources for
resilience in childhood and adolescence. Health & Place,28,1–13.
Chen, B., Vansteenkiste, M., Beyers, W., Boone, L., Deci, E., Van der Kaap-Deeder, J., . . . Ryan, R. (2015). Basic
psychological need satisfaction, need frustration, and need strength across four cultures. Motivation & Emotion,
39, 216–236.
Cheon, S. H., Reeve, J., & Ntoumanis, N. (2018). A needs-supportive intervention to help PE teachers enhance
students’prosocial behavior and diminish antisocial behaviour. Psychology of Sport & Exercise,35,74–88.
Clough, P., Houge Mackenzie, S., Mallabon, L., & Brymer, E. (2016). Adventurous physical activity environments:
A mainstream intervention for mental health. Sports Medicine,46, 963–968.
Coryn, C. L. S., Schroter, D. C., & Hanssen, C. E. (2009). Adding a time-series design element to the success case
method to improve methodological rigor: An application for non-profit program evaluation. American Journal
of Evaluation,30,80–92.
Dean, H. (2009). Critiquing capabilities: The distractions of a beguiling concept. Critical Social Policy,29(2),
261–278.
Diener, E. (2000). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and a proposal for a national index. American
Psychologist,55(1), 34–43.
Diener, E., Emmons, R. A., Larsen, R. J., & Griffin, S. (1985). The satisfaction with life scale. Journal of Personality
Assessment,49,71–75.
Diener, E., Oishi, S., & Lucas, R. E. (2009). Subjective well-being: The science of happiness and life satisfaction. In
C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (2nd ed., pp. 187–194). Oxford: Oxford
University Press.
Duerden, M. D., Taniguchi, S., & Widmer, M. (2012). Antecedents of identity development in a structured
recreation setting: A qualitative inquiry. Journal of Adolescent Research,27(2), 183–202.
Durr, L. I. (2009). Optimal challenge: The impact of adventure experiences on subjective well-being. Journal of
Experiential Education,31, 451–455.
Ewert, A., Gilbertson, K., Luo, Y. C., & Voight, A. (2013). Beyond “Because It’s There”: Motivations for pursuing
adventure recreational activities. Journal of Leisure Research,45(1), 91–111.
Ewert, A., & Hollenhorst, S. (1989). Testing the adventure model: Empirical support for a model of risk recreation
participation. Journal of Leisure Research,21, 124–139.
Ewert, A., & Yoshino, A. (2011). The influence of short-term adventure-based experiences on levels of resilience.
Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning,11,35–50.
Ewert, A. W. (1983). Outdoor adventure and self-concept: A research analysis. Eugene, OR: Center of Leisure
Studies, University of Oregon.
Fredrickson, B. L. (2001). The role of positive emotions in positive psychology: The broaden-and-build theory of
positive emotions. American Psychologist,56,218–226.
Frumkin, H., Bratman, G. N., Breslow, S. J., Cochran, B., Kahn, P. H., Jr., Lawler, J. J., . . . Wood, S. A. (2017).
Nature contact and human health: A research agenda. Environmental Health Perspectives,125(7). doi:10.1289/
EHP1663
Fujiwara, D., & Campbell, R. (2011). Valuation techniques for social cost-benefit analysis: Stated preference, revealed
preference and subjective well-being approaches. UK: HM Treasury.
Gagné, M., Ryan, R., & Bargmann, K. (2003). Autonomy support and need satisfaction in the motivation and
well-being of gymnasts. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology,15, 372–390.
Gasper, D. (2010). Understanding the diversity of conceptions of well-being and quality of life. The Journal of Socio-
Economics,39(3), 351–360.
Hattie, J., Marsh, H. W., Neill, J. T., & Richards, G. E. (1997). Adventure education and outward bound: Out-of-
class experiences that make a lasting difference. Review of Educational Research,67,43–87.
Hodge, K., & Gucciardi, D. F. (2015). Antisocial and prosocial behavior in sport: The role of motivational climate,
basic psychological needs, and moral disengagement. Journal of Sport & Exercise Psychology,37, 257–273.
Houge Mackenzie, S., & Brymer, E. (2018). Conceptualizing adventurous nature sport: A positive psychology
perspective. Annals of Leisure Research,1–13. doi:10.1080/11745398.2018.1483733
Houge Mackenzie, S., Hodge, K., & Boyes, M. (2011). Expanding the flow model in adventure activities: A reversal
theory perspective. Journal of Leisure Research,43(4), 519–544.
LEISURE STUDIES 13
Houge Mackenzie, S., Son, J. S., & Hollenhorst, S. (2014). Unifying psychology and experiential education: Toward
an integrated understanding of why it works. Journal of Experiential Education,37,75–88.
Huta, V., & Waterman, A. S. (2014). Eudaimonia and its distinction from hedonia: Developing a classification and
terminology for understanding conceptual and operational definitions. Journal of Happiness Studies,15,
1425–1456.
Kahneman, D., Diener, E., & Schwarz, N. (Eds.). (1999). Well-being: Foundations of hedonic psychology. New York,
NY: Russell Sage Foundation.
Kaplan, S. (1995). The restorative benefits of nature: Toward an integrative framework. Journal of Environmental
Psychology,15, 169–182.
Kashdan, T. B., Julian, T., Merritt, K., & Uswatte, G. (2006). Social anxiety and posttraumatic stress in combat
veterans: Relations to well-being and character strengths. Behavior Research & Therapy,44, 561–583.
Kerr, J. H., & Mackenzie, S. H. (2012). Multiple motives for participating in adventure sports. Psychology of Sport
and Exercise,13(5), 649–657.
Lee, K., & Ewert, A. (2018). Understanding the motivations of serious leisure participation: A self-determination
approach. Annals of Leisure Research. doi:10.1080/11745398.2018.1469420
Lesik, S. (2006). Applying the regression-discontinuity design to infer causality with non-random assignment.
Review of Higher Education,30,1–19.
Linley, P. A., Joseph, S., Harrington, S., & Wood, A. M. (2006). Positive psychology: Past, present, and (possible)
future. The Journal of Positive Psychology,1,3–16.
Lloyd, K., & Little, D. E. (2005). “Quality of life, aren’t we always searching for that?”: How women can achieve
enhanced quality of life through participation in outdoor adventure recreation. Leisure/Loisir,29(2), 147–181.
Lloyd, K., & Little, D. E. (2010). Self-determination theory as a framework for understanding women’s psycholo-
gical well-being outcomes from leisure-time physical activity. Leisure Sciences,32(4), 369–385.
Lü, W., Wang, Z., Liu, Y., & Zhang, H. (2014). Resilience as a mediator between extraversion, neuroticism and
happiness, PA and NA. Personality and Individual Differences,63, 128–133.
Lynch, P., & Dibben, M. (2016). Exploring motivations for adventure recreation events: A New Zealand study.
Annals of Leisure Research,19(1), 80–97.
Lyng, S. G. (Ed.). (2005). Edgework: The sociology of risk taking. New York, NY: Routledge.
MacGregor, A., Woodman, T., & Hardy, L. (2014). Risk is good for you: An investigation of the processes and
outcomes associated with high-risk sport. Journal of Exercise, Movement, and Sport,46(1), 175.
Mageau, G. A., & Vallerand, R. J. (2003). The coach-athlete relationship: A motivational model. Journal of Sports
Sciences,21, 883–904.
Martela, F., Ryan, R., & Steger, M. (2018). Meaningfulness as satisfaction of autonomy, competence, relatedness,
and beneficence: Comparing the four satisfactions and positive affect as predictors of meaning in life. Journal of
Happiness Studies 19, 1261–1282.
Martela, F., & Ryan, R. M. (2016). The benefits of benevolence: Basic psychological needs, beneficence, and the
enhancement of well-being. Journal of Personality,84, 750–764.
Martela, F., & Steger, M. F. (2016). The three meanings of meaning in life: Distinguishing coherence, purpose and
significance. Journal of Positive Psychology,11, 531–545.
Mohr, L. (1999). The qualitative method of impact analysis. American Journal of Evaluation,20,69–84.
Molix, L., & Nichols, C. (2013). Satisfaction of basic psychological needs as a mediator of the relationship between
community esteem and wellbeing. International Journal of Wellbeing,3,20–34.
Mouratidis, A., Vansteenkiste, M., Sideridis, G., & Lens, W. (2011). Vitality and interest-enjoyment as a function of
class-to-class variation in need-supportive teaching and pupils’autonomous motivation. Journal of Educational
Psychology,103, 353–366.
Mutz, M., & Müller, J. (2016). Mental health benefits of outdoor adventures: Results from two pilot studies. Journal
of Adolescence,49, 105–114.
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,15, 555–578.
Ng, J. Y. Y., Lonsdale, C., & Hodge, K. (2011). The basic needs satisfaction in sport scale (BNSSS): Instrument
development and initial validity evidence. Psychology of Sport & Exercise,12, 257–264.
Pomfret, G. (2006). Mountaineering adventure tourists: A conceptual framework for research. Tourism
Management,27(1), 113–123.
Pretty, J., Peacock, J., Sellens, M., & Griffin, M. (2005). The mental and physical health outcomes of green exercise.
International Journal of Environmental Health Research,15, 319–337.
Reis, H. T., Sheldon, K. M., Gable, S. L., Roscoe, R., & Ryan, R. (2000). Daily well-being: The role of autonomy,
competence, and relatedness. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin,26, 419–435.
Richmond, D., Sibthorp, J., Gookin, J., Annarella, S., & Ferri, S. (2018). Complementing classroom learning
through outdoor adventure education: Out-of-school-time experiences that make a difference. Journal of
Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning,18(1), 36–52.
14 S. HOUGE MACKENZIE AND K. HODGE
Rocchi, M., Pelletier, L., Cheung, S., Baxter, D., & Beaudry, S. (2017). Assessing need-supportive and
need-thwarting interpersonal behaviours: The interpersonal behaviours questionnaire (IBQ). Personality &
Individual Differences,104, 423–433.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2001). On happiness and human potentials: A review of research on hedonic and
eudaimonia well-being. Annual Review of Psychology,52, 141–166.
Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: Basic psychological needs in motivation, development,
and wellness. New York, NY: Guilford Press.
Ryan, R. M., & Huta, V. (2009). Wellness as healthy functioning or wellness as happiness: The importance of
eudaimonia thinking (response to the Kashdan et al. and Waterman discussion). Journal of Positive Psychology,
4, 202–204.
Ryan, R. M., & Martela, M. F. (2016). Eudaimonia as a way of living: Connecting Aristotle with self-determination
theory. In J. Vittersø (Ed.), Handbook of eudaimonia well-being (pp. 109–122). Cham: Springer.
Ryan, R. M., Weinstein, N., Bernstein, J., Brown, K. W., Mistretta, L., & Gagné, M. (2010). Vitalizing effects of
being outdoors and in nature. Journal of Environmental Psychology,30, 159–169.
Ryff,C.D.(1989). Happiness is everything, or is it? Explorations on the meaning of psychological well-being.
Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,57, 1069–1081.
Ryff,C.D.(2013). Psychological well-being revisited: Advances in the science and practice of eudaimonia.
Psychotherapy & Psychosomatics,83,10–28.
Scarf, D., Hayhurst, J. G., Riordan, B. C., Boyes, M., Ruffman, T., & Hunter, J. A. (2017). Increasing resilience in
adolescents: The importance of social connectedness in adventure education programmes. Australasian
Psychiatry,25(2), 154–156.
Scarf, D., Kafka, S., Hayhurst, J., Jang, K., Boyes, M., Thomson, R., & Hunter, J. A. (2018). Satisfying psychological
needs on the high seas: Explaining increases self-esteem following an adventure education programme. Journal
of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning,18,165–175.
Scriven, M. (2008). A summative evaluation of RCT methodology: An alternative approach to causal research.
Journal of MultiDisciplinary Evaluation,5,11–24.
Shadish, W. R., Cook, T. D., & Campbell, D. (2002). Experimental and quasi-experimental designs for generalized
causal inference. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Sheard, M., & Golby, J. (2006). The efficacy of an outdoor adventure education curriculum on selected aspects of
positive psychological development. Journal of Experiential Education,29(2), 187–209.
Sheldon, K. M., & Hilpert, J. C. (2012). The balanced measure of psychological needs (BMPN) scale: An alternative
domain general measure of need satisfaction. Motivation & Emotion,36, 439–451.
Shellman, A. (2011). Looking into the black box. Journal of Experiential Education,33(4), 402–405.
Sibthorp, J., Paisley, K., Gookin, J., & Furman, N. (2008). The pedagogic value of student autonomy in adventure
education. Journal of Experiential Education,31, 136–151.
Stats, N. Z. (2018). Home. Accessed from https://www.stats.govt.nz.
Steger, M. F. (2009). Meaning in life. In S. J. Lopez (Ed.), Oxford handbook of positive psychology (2nd ed., pp.
679–687). Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Stenling, A., & Tafvelin, S. (2014). Transformational leadership and well-being in sports: The mediating role of
need satisfaction. Journal of Applied Sport Psychology,26, 182–196.
Swarbrooke, J., Beard, C., Leckie, S., & Pomfret, G. (2003). Adventure tourism: The new frontier. Burlington, MA:
Butterworth-Heinemann.
Testoni, S., & Dolan, P. (2018). Assessing the relationship between subjective wellbeing and spending time with family
in the outdoors. What works centre for wellbeing. Retrieved from www.whatworkswellbeing.org.
Testoni, S., Mansfield, L., & Dolan, P. (2018). Defining and measuring subjective well-being for sport policy.
International Journal of Sport Policy and Politics,10(4), 815–827.
Tsaur, S. H., Lin, W. R., & Cheng, T. M. (2015). Toward a structural model of challenge experience in adventure
recreation. Journal of Leisure Research,47(3), 322–336.
Van Den Broeck, A., Vansteenkiste, M., De Witte, H., Soenens, B., & Lens, W. (2010). Capturing autonomy,
competence and relatedness at work: Construction and initial validation of the work-related basic need
satisfaction scale. Journal of Occupational & Organizational Psychology,83, 981–1002.
Vansteenkiste, M., & Ryan, R. M. (2013). On psychological growth and vulnerability: Basic psychological need
satisfaction and need frustration as a unifying principle. Journal of Psychotherapy Integration,23, 263–280.
Walsh, J., & Aubry, P. (2007). Behavior management through adventure. Reclaiming Children and Youth,16(1),
36–39.
Wang, C. K. J., Liu, W. C., & Kahlid, A. (2006). Effects of a five-day outward bound course on female students in
Singapore. Australian Journal of Outdoor Education,10,20–28.
Williams, G., Cox, E., Kouides, R., & Deci, E. (1999). Presenting the facts about smoking to adolescents: The effects
of an autonomy-supportive style. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine,153, 959–964.
Wurdinger, S., & Paxton, T. (2003). Using multiple levels of experience to promote autonomy in adventure
education students. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning,3(1), 41–48.
LEISURE STUDIES 15
