Download as pdf or txt
Download as pdf or txt
You are on page 1of 13

Sociology of leisure

Ken Roberts University of Liverpool, UK

abstract This article reviews the topics that have been investigated, the research methods that have been
employed, the main theoretical perspectives, agreed conclusions and issues that remain unresolved since
this sub-discipline was formed in the 1960s. We see that solid advances in knowledge have been accom-
plished through research into the relationships between uses of leisure and occupations, gender roles and
life course stages. Meanwhile, grand claims about the role of leisure in society have yet to be developed
into testable theories about the roles of particular kinds of leisure under specified circumstances. Also, the
sociology of leisure has yet to embrace the likelihood that the western version is not necessarily the sole
form of modern leisure.
keywords age u gender u leisure u life course u social class u time u unemployment u well-being u
work

Theoretical approaches

History and status within sociology and faculty were conducting investigations relevant
The sociology of leisure was created as a sub-discipline to, parks and other public recreation services, but the
in the 1960s, indicated by the formation of the curricula, and the research interests of staff, spanned
International Sociological Association’s Research the whole of leisure. From the 1970s onwards, leisure
Committee 13 (RC13) in 1970. Sociologists had studies departments and courses spread throughout
studied leisure previously (see in particular De Grazia, universities in the UK, Australia and New Zealand,
1962; Lundberg et al., 1934; Veblen, 1970 [1899]), and then, albeit far less densely, throughout the rest of
but usually as an offshoot in studies of workers in par- Europe, Asia and Latin America. A consequence is
ticular occupations, or in family and neighbourhood that everywhere in the world, sociologists who study
research. It was only with the birth of RC13 that it leisure have been as likely, probably more likely, to be
became possible for sociologists worldwide to identify based in leisure studies rather than squarely in sociol-
collectively as sharing a professional interest in leisure. ogy departments, and within leisure studies the
From these beginnings, right through to the present boundaries between sociological and other contribu-
day, this sub-discipline has encountered difficulties in tions have never been clear.
defining its boundaries and claiming possession of its The sociology of leisure’s submersion in leisure
field. There are several reasons for this. studies has been deepened by the sub-discipline (of
sociology) and leisure studies (the field) sharing com-
Leisure studies mon specialist research tools. These are time budget
At the same time, in the 1960s, when the sociology of and leisure participation surveys, sometimes comple-
leisure was being institutionalized, universities across mented by data on household and individual incomes
North America were creating a subject called ‘leisure and expenditures. These sources sketch the ‘big pic-
studies’. Initially the undergraduate and postgraduate ture’ against which more focused enquiries explore
programmes were preparing students for careers in, particular leisure activities, and the uses of leisure, the

Sociopedia.isa
© 2010 The Author(s)
© 2010 ISA (Editorial Arrangement of sociopedia.isa)
DOI ————

1
Roberts Sociology of leisure

motivations, constraints faced and gratifications commercial (Hesmondhalgh, 2007). Top sport has
gained by different sections of the public. been wrenched from its voluntary sector roots and
Sociologists have never been able to impose their has become primarily a business, an entertainment
own preferred methods of classifying the basic leisure spectacle. Major arts and sports events are now com-
data that they work with. Leisure is routinely broken peted for by countries and cities that seek to become
down into common sense categories, which broadly hosts primarily for commercial benefits (see Roche,
coincide with how the leisure industries are organ- 2000).
ized (media, sport, tourism, hospitality, heritage,
gambling, etc.). Sociologists have proposed interest- Fragmentation within
ing alternative classifications. One is according to In some respects, the sociology of leisure has fallen
whether leisure is spent as a consumer (of commer- victim to its own success in reaching a size where it
cial goods and services), as a citizen (using public has been possible for specialists in sport and tourism
sector goods and services), as a member (of a volun- to organize their own conferences, form scholarly
tary association), or privately. Despite the post- associations and launch their own journals, thus lim-
1990s debate about an alleged decline in civil society iting the fields and making it easier for everyone to
and social capital (see Putnam, 2000), there have keep abreast of knowledge within their own special-
been no representative sample surveys in any coun- ties. These sources of fragmentation affect all disci-
try which reveal the proportions of leisure time that plines, but leisure may be especially prone. Students,
are accounted for in these alternative ways, and the teachers and researchers are far more likely to be
differences between sociodemographic groups. enthusiastic, even passionate, about a particular art
Another extremely interesting sociological classi- form or sport than about leisure in general.
fication distinguishes ‘serious’ from ‘casual’ leisure, Moreover, ‘leisure industries’ is not their own term.
and also recognizes a mid-type of project-based Providers organize themselves into tourism, TV,
leisure (Stebbins, 1992, 2001, 2005). These concepts publishing, computer games, etc. They may be more
have inspired a series of studies of particular forms of likely to recruit graduates from specialist courses,
serious leisure, but again, we still do not know in any and look to specialists when commissioning
country what proportion of leisure is ‘serious’, or research, than to departments of leisure studies (or
whether this kind of leisure is concentrated within sociology).
specific sociodemographic groups. A sociology of The sociology of leisure has needed, and needs
leisure with stronger claims on its field would very perpetually, to demonstrate that there is value-added
likely have been more successful in promoting its by scanning the entire field of leisure. It needs to
own classifications. This is important. Basic data show that inserting an intermediate level of analysis
about how leisure is used are the foundation from is preferable to leaping straight from data on sport or
which theories are built, and against which theories tourism to theories about society at large. It also
are tested. If the basic data are inadequate, the entire needs to show that leisure is a concept with strengths
enterprise is compromised. that complement those of consumption and culture,
and that sociologists, against leisure scholars from
Challenges from within sociology other disciplines, have something extra, something
Within its own discipline the sociology of leisure has distinctively sociological and valuable, that they can
always faced rival claims on its field. Initially the contribute. Here we need to demonstrate the value
main challenge was from cultural studies, especially of our broader knowledge about the main social divi-
the genre that examined popular cultures. Media sions – by occupations and social class, gender and
sociology has always positioned itself outside the age – and of our theories about social systems, social
sociology of leisure, and likewise the sociology of the structure and social change.
arts. Youth researchers have been more likely to
investigate youth cultures than youth leisure.
A strong challenge during the last 30 years has Evidence
been from the sociology of consumption. This chal-
lenge has arisen in a context, in the world’s richer Wo rk and leisure
countries, where leisure spending has been growing This was the sociology of leisure’s original main
strongly, much more strongly than the growth of research issue. It became so simultaneously in three
leisure time, and meanwhile commerce has spread different ways. First, modern leisure was treated as a
into areas of leisure where provision was once main- product of the modernization of work. Second, a
ly by the state or the voluntary sector. In Europe in long-term growth of leisure was seen as an outcome
the 1970s over 80 percent of TV was by public serv- of the shrinkage of work time. Third, uses of leisure
ice broadcasters whereas today over 80 percent is offered additional evidence (if any more was needed,

2
Roberts Sociology of leisure

given what other areas of sociological research had ers would be able to take sabbaticals. People would
already unearthed) of the ‘long arm of the job’. enjoy ‘the time of their lives’ (Best, 1978) and
humanity would enter a ‘new Eden’ (Neulinger,
Modern wo rk, modern leisure: Most sociol- 1990).
ogists have treated modern leisure as a historical out- Some sociologists were cautious. Harold
come – a product of the broader division of labour Wilenski (1963) noted that most of the extra free
associated with modernization – rather than a socio- time created since the early decades of industrialism
cultural universal. There is continuing debate about had enlarged the size of groups outside the paid
whether a leisure concept can be usefully applied to workforce (mainly the young and the retired), that
the free time, amusements and pastimes of pre-mod- the decline in hours of paid work had affected only
ern times, and whether these societies had a different manual employees, and that their gains had achieved
kind of leisure (as argued, for example, by Veal and no more than winning back the free time that was
Lynch, 1996). One view is that modern leisure is lost during industrialization. Staffan Linder (1970),
actually a debased version of the purer leisure an economist, noted that leisure time was increasing
enjoyed in ancient Greece, albeit just by a minority more slowly than consumer spending power, and
of free men (see De Grazia, 1962). However, there is forecast the growth of a ‘harried leisure class’ whose
agreement that modern leisure is different. main problem would be ‘finding the time’. Geoff
During the industrial revolution paid work was Godbey (1975) claimed that in the USA it was not
substantially relocated into offices, mines and facto- leisure, but a condition that he described as ‘anti-
ries. In industry employees worked at set times, fixed leisure’ that was growing – basically time-pressured,
by the clock, under work-specific authority and compulsive activity and consumption. These warn-
often amid work-specific relationships with col- ing voices have proved remarkably prescient.
leagues. Modernized industrial work was organized The terms of the work time/leisure time issue
rationally – to minimize unit costs and to maximize changed abruptly in 1991. We can date this precise-
output per unit of resources invested. Customary ly because the catalyst was the publication of Juliette
ways were swept aside, if necessary. Work was cer- Schor’s book, The Overworked American. Schor,
tainly not organized so as to maximize job satisfac- another economist, claimed that in America working
tion. Thus work became a part of life, and leisure, time was lengthening, that Americans were working
while not the whole of non-work time, was located too long for their own good, pressured by greedy
within it, and in modern societies it is during this employers and the ‘addictive power of consumption’.
leisure time, their own time, that people enjoy rela- Schor’s book ignited a search for other countries
tive freedom to determine their own activities, and where working time was lengthening (see Zuzanek et
to do things for the pure enjoyment. al., 1998). Up to now there is no country where a
general lengthening of work time has been con-
Wo rk time and leisure time: The pioneers of firmed (as opposed to alleged). In the USA, Schor’s
the sociology of leisure in the 1960s were inspired, claim has not been corroborated by time budget evi-
above all else, by the historical growth of leisure dence (see Robinson and Godbey, 1999). However,
time. They knew that standards of living were rising; by the end of the 1990s there was agreement that the
they were writing during the first decades of so- earlier shortening of work schedules had ended,
called mass affluence. They knew that the benefits of probably in the 1970s. Although there are ‘time pio-
economic growth were being taken partly in the neers’ (see Horning et al., 1995) who have deliber-
form of higher real earnings and levels of consumer ately opted to downshift to enjoy slower and more
spending, but they were more impressed by the frugal lifestyles, up to now these pioneers have not
extent to which working time had been rolled back. been trend-setters. Rather, work–life balance has
Since the industrial revolution the length of a normal become an issue all over the world. Up until the
work-day had been reduced from 12, to 10, then to 1980s, balancing work and the rest of life was con-
eight hours. The weekend had expanded from one, sidered a problem confined to women who had to
to one-and-a-half, then two full days. Annual holi- cope with the double shift (paid jobs followed by
day entitlement had grown. The normal working life housework), and shift workers who were unable to
had been trimmed at both ends. Thus in the 1960s synchronize with the routines of other family mem-
Joffre Dumazedier (1967) was able to proclaim a bers, and whose normal sleep and eating patterns
great historical inversion – the typical worker was were disrupted. By the end of the 1990s, work–life
spending more time at leisure than at work. There imbalance, presumed to be due to overwork, had
appeared to be no reason why these trends should become a problem that was believed to afflict entire
not continue. The four-day work-week was confi- workforces.
dently forecast. A time was envisaged when all work- Another discovery during this renewed interest in

3
Roberts Sociology of leisure

hours of work and work–life balance has been that trast, opposition was likely when people found their
today’s working classes put in fewer hours than man- jobs disagreeable and celebrated the end of a shift by
agers and professional-grade staff. Various explana- doing things that were enjoyed largely because they
tions have been suggested for the longer hours of were different.
higher-grade employees: presenteeism through fear Despite the clarity of the case studies, it was
of redundancy or loss of promotion opportunities; always difficult to identify these work–leisure rela-
busyness as a new badge of honour; and work as the tionships in large-scale survey research. It is likely
new leisure (see Gershuny, 2005; Lewis, 2003). that occupations with characteristic and distinctive
However, we also know that sections of the pop- uses of leisure have always been exceptional. The
ulation differ in their ability to resolve potential time examples offered were invariably male-dominated
pressure problems. Wealthy individuals and house- occupations, and were typically in towns where there
holds can buy time by paying for services such as was one dominant industry, and where work and
home and car maintenance. Some sections of the neighbourhood relationships were mutually reinforc-
workforce enjoy considerable time sovereignty (the ing. Economic change (de-industrialization), resi-
ability to decide exactly when to work), and also dential mobility, the motor car and television have
place sovereignty (deciding where to work). Manual been dissolving these social formations. Thus the
employees tend to be disadvantaged on both counts. middle classes simply doing more has become the
Their employers usually decide when they can (or outstanding and starkest example of the long arm of
must) work, and working usually involves being the job.
present at the workplace. Managers and profession- In the mid-1990s, initially in North America,
al-grade staff are more likely to be able to work at researchers ‘discovered’ that the middle classes (man-
home, and at times that are most convenient for agers and professional-grade employees) were typi-
them (see Van den Broek et al., 2002). Hence the cally leisure omnivores, characterized by the wide
occupational groups that work the longest hours variety of their leisure tastes and activities (Erikson,
have the highest participation rates in virtually all 1996; Peterson and Kern, 1996). Subsequently, mid-
forms of out-of-home leisure. They save time main- dle-class omnivores have been spotted all over the
ly by watching less television (Roberts, 2007). world (see, for example, Sintas and Alvarez, 2002).
The middle classes not only dine out more frequent-
The long arm of the job: This phrase under- ly than the working classes but do so in a wider vari-
lines the extent to which people’s jobs control not ety of catering establishments (Warde et al., 1999).
only their lives at work but also what they do in their The middle classes now produce most rock and pop
‘own’ time. From the very beginnings of leisure as well as classical musicians. One explanation of this
research it has been noted repeatedly that the middle phenomenon is the scale of upward social mobility
classes ‘do more’, the main exception today being tel- into expanding middle-class occupations (see Van
evision viewing. There are numerous reasons. These Eijck, 1999). The original statements of the omni-
do not include the middle classes enjoying more vore thesis alleged that middle-class omnivorousness
leisure time. The reasons do include childhood represented a change: the middle classes had ceased
socialization in middle-class households and extend- to be distinctively highbrow. However, there are so
ed education, but these influences occur in the con- far unanswered questions.
text of the middle classes being able to afford to do First, highbrow tastes have never been common
more. This has always been among leisure research’s throughout all sections of the middle classes, as
starkest and most consistent findings. Pierre Bourdieu (1984) noted. So is middle-class
However, in the 1950s and 1960s rather more omnivorousness really a new phenomenon? Second,
attention was paid to how particular occupations we need to distinguish between individual and col-
tended to foster distinctive uses of leisure. This was lective omnivorousness. Researchers continue to
observed among deep-sea trawlermen (Tunstall, identify different and very distinctive middle-class
1962), coalminers (Dennis et al., 1956), assembly lifestyle groups (see Savage et al., 1992; Wynne,
line workers (Friedmann, 1961) and so-called organ- 1998). Third, are these middle-class lifestyle differ-
ization men (Whyte, 1957). Spillover and compen- ences, which have been noted by ‘class’ as well as by
satory work–leisure relationships were distinguished. leisure researchers (see Burrows and Gane, 2006;
Stanley Parker (1971) relabelled and expanded these Veal, 1993; Vester, 2005), weakening the sociopolit-
concepts into an extension, neutrality and opposi- ical unity of the middle classes? Or, as the original
tion typology of work–leisure relationships, arguing statements of the omnivore thesis claimed, are these
that extension was most likely when people found differences, and an awareness of and an ability to dis-
their jobs interesting, when they identified with their cuss a wide variety of tastes and topics, a source of
work roles, and with work colleagues also. In con- middle-class unity and distinction, separating those

4
Roberts Sociology of leisure

concerned culturally from a working class whose software, musical and other kinds of ‘texts’). Some
leisure tastes are more uniform and wholly lowbrow, leisure industries have glamour roles (sports and
and whose leisure time is dominated by television? screen stars). Employees can be attracted into mun-
Sociology’s distinctive contribution to debates dane jobs by their proximity to glamour, but overall
about work and leisure lies in its ability to relate all the leisure industries contain many mundane occu-
the relevant differences – whether to do with work pations. Many of the jobs are seasonal (especially in
time schedules or uses of leisure time – to broader tourism), part-time, and involve being on duty at
issues of class structure and class formation. unsocial hours (jobs in the night-time economy, for
example). The jobs score low on both time and place
Unemployment: There was a flurry of studies sovereignty. Employees are often required to perform
into the leisure of the unemployed in the 1980s, by aesthetic labour (see Warhurst and Nickson, 2007),
when mass unemployment had returned to the west- where the appearance and personality of the employ-
ern world after what are now recalled as the ‘30 glo- ee are part of the service rendered to customers.
rious years’ – the post-Second World War decades of The growth of leisure has not led to leisurely lives
full employment and steady economic growth. The for all. Rather, it has created divided societies. On
initial questions posed about the leisure of the unem- the one hand, there are those who work long hours,
ployed were soon answered. What are the effects on in well-paid occupations, and who are the big leisure
leisure of unemployment? We learnt quickly that the spenders. On the other hand, there are those who
unemployed tend to ‘do less’ for a variety of reasons work in low-paid precarious occupations (many in
– financial, loss of work-based social relationships the leisure industries), and whose own leisure is sub-
and loss of status (reluctance to expose spoiled iden- ject to severe time and money constraints (see
tities to the public gaze). Does participation in Seabrook, 1988).
leisure activities help to maintain the well-being and
morale of the unemployed? Yes, when levels of Gender and leisure
leisure activity are maintained (which is exceptional), During the 1980s this replaced work as the leading
but even then not at the levels of well-being that are issue in the sociology of leisure. Second-wave femi-
normal within the employed population (see nism forced gender up the research agenda.
Glyptis, 1989; Havitz et al., 2004). The research Feminists’ initial complaints were that leisure
effort (though not unemployment itself ) subsided research had neglected gender in general and
when these main questions were answered, though women’s leisure in particular. These criticisms were
there are continuous efforts (often monitored, lead- immediately accepted, and it is now 20 years since it
ing to some evidence of ‘positive outcomes’) to use was possible to complain that gender or women’s
leisure provisions to prevent or remedy social exclu- leisure were neglected. The original questions raised
sion (see also below). about leisure and gender have now been answered,
Once again, there is much to gain from setting and new issues have taken their place.
unemployment (and its leisure implications) in the
broader context of class relationships. The unem- Women and patriarchy : An initial claim was
ployed (long-term and recurrent) are really just that in leisure women were the disadvantaged sex
extreme cases of the working class at leisure doing due to a combination of time and money con-
less. Much of the damage inflicted by unemploy- straints, and heavier sociocultural regulation than
ment is simply an extreme case of the effects of low experienced by men (see Deem, 1986; Green et al.,
pay and job insecurity. Also, in consumer societies 1990; Henderson et al., 1989). Research evidence
the unemployed, to an even greater extent than the has generally endorsed these claims, albeit with some
low-paid, suffer a double stigma. They are unwanted important qualifications.
as producers and they are flawed consumers – Women’s leisure time disadvantages arise from
unwanted in society’s main ‘cathedrals’ of consump- the double-shift, with housework and childcare
tion (Bauman, 1998). remaining primarily women’s work. Time budgets
show that men are doing more housework than in
Leisure wo rk : Higher levels of leisure spending the past, but that women still do far more than men.
and leisure activity have led to the expansion of the Time budgets consistently show that women with
leisure industries, which have become a main, if not paid jobs have less leisure time than their male part-
the main, source of new jobs in countries all over the ners. When all men and women are included, the
world. same time budgets consistently show that overall the
The leisure industries include some of the so- sexes have more or less equal amounts of leisure
called creative industries, whose main asset is intel- time: the reduced leisure of women with paid jobs is
lectual property rights (for example, computer counterbalanced by the expanded leisure time of

5
Roberts Sociology of leisure

non-employed women. That said, the evidence much they do in this time), whereas women’s
shows that overall women’s leisure is more fragment- appraisals are in terms of the quality of their experi-
ed (they are less likely than men to enjoy long, ences (see Gregory, 1982; Lenskyj, 1988). Hence the
unbroken periods of leisure), and less of women’s alleged need to develop a feminine concept of leisure
leisure time is spent in adult-only situations (see and to adopt feminist research methods (see
Bittman and Wajcman, 1999). Wearing, 1998).
As regards money, it is accepted that women have
been and are still disadvantaged. Men are more like- Men and masculinity: Men’s studies requires
ly to be in employment, earning their own money. masculinity, just like femininity, to be treated as a
Women in employment generally earn less than problematic social construct, following which we
men. Household income is not always shared out recognize that there can be different versions of mas-
equally between males and females. Women are less culinity (maybe specific to social classes or ethnic
likely than men to be able to separate their ‘own’ groups), and that some men may find their mascu-
from household funds (Pahl, 1990). As the main line scripts just as constraining as femininity is for
earners in most households, men appear the more some women.
likely to feel that they have the right to spend on As yet there are no signs of men collectively
their own pleasures, and also to take (without neces- rejecting all forms of masculinity. Rather, we now
sarily negotiating) the time to do so (see Barrell et al., have abundant evidence of men using leisure
1989). to retain conventional masculine identities in
Sociocultural regulation refers to how it has been inhospitable historical contexts. Working-class mas-
considered improper (more so for women than for culinity in particular could be in crisis. De-
men) to consume alcohol fulsomely and become industrialization has destroyed swathes of jobs that
intoxicated, to play strenuous, aggressive, competi- required toughness and endurance. Women’s greater
tive sports, to go alone to cinemas and other leisure independence has deprived males of the traditional
places, and to enjoy leisure in mixed-sex company breadwinner role. One male response has been to use
when not accompanied by one’s sexual partner. leisure to maintain conventional masculine identi-
However, researchers have noted that times are ties. Sports events followed by nights out with the
changing. In western countries the differences lads become occasions for celebrating conventional
between men’s and women’s uses of leisure have nar- masculinity (see Blackshaw, 2003).
rowed. Rates of sport participation have converged,
women have been closing the gender gap in alcohol Sexualities: Most leisure sites are places where
consumption, and groups of women now enjoy girls’ sexual roles and identities are celebrated and enacted.
nights out in the same places as are frequented by Anyone who enters a mainstream leisure facility is
groups of men (see Sweeting and West, 2003). The likely to be treated as a sexualized subject, and to feel
trend is towards genderless leisure (Robinson and able to treat others similarly. Women in particular
Godbey, 1999). Needless to say, the genderless trend are likely to be subject to sought or unwanted atten-
is not confined to leisure. It is evident in labour force tion.
participation rates and earned incomes. Sociology’s interest has been, first, in the use of
Cross-cutting the debate about the extent to leisure spaces to develop and enjoy sexual partner-
which the leisure of one sex has been and remains ships, and second, in how the operation of hetero-
disadvantaged, there have been claims that women’s normativity marginalizes people with other sexual
leisure is qualitatively different to men’s leisure. It has identities – gays and lesbians, and presumably pae-
been claimed that mainstream leisure research has dophiles also. Breaching hetero-normativity still
proceeded unwittingly with a masculine concept of invites ridicule or worse in sports clubs and, indeed,
leisure, and that, as a result, women’s leisure has been in most leisure places (see Wellard, 2002). A
misrepresented. Men’s leisure has allegedly been response in sociology has been the development of
treated as the norm, and women and their leisure queer studies, in this case viewing leisure sites from
have been subject to othering. The main gender dif- the perspectives of non-heteros (see Cauldwell,
ferences are said to be, first, that men associate 2006). A response in the wider western societies has
leisure with particular times (when they are not at been for gays, lesbians and bisexuals to create their
work) thus making time budgets appropriate for own leisure spaces – bars, villages, sport clubs, etc.
quantifying their leisure, whereas women tend to (see Skeggs, 1999).
identify leisure with particular kinds of experience,
activities and being with particular people. Second, it The life course
is alleged that men tend to appraise their leisure This is another field where accomplished research
quantitatively (how much time they have and how has posed a new set of major questions.

6
Roberts Sociology of leisure

Leisure and age: Sociological work on leisure age groups may not be a straightforward age effect
and life course really began with the Rapoports’ pio- but could be a cohort effect, due to the poverty of
neering study in London in the 1970s (Rapoport childhood leisure socialization years ago.
and Rapoport, 1975). These investigators observed The baby boomer cohorts who are now
how the family life-cycle created different preoccupa- approaching or entering retirement are the first
tions and interests at successive life stages, which cohorts to have grown up in post-scarcity societies.
interacted with employment careers to produce char- The Woopies (well-off older people), who remain
acteristic uses of leisure. Shortly afterwards, in the highly leisure active, are a minority within current
USA, Estes and Wilenski (1978) identified the ‘life- cohorts but will become more numerous if the baby
cycle squeeze’. This refers to the squeeze on adults’ boomers turn out to be a change generation who
time and money when they embark on new house- remain willing to take on debt and, if necessary, to
hold and family formation. Family life events are still spend capital that is tied up in their dwellings, in
the main junctures when leisure patterns unfreeze order to sustain active leisure for as long as they are
and are reconstituted (Gershuny, 2003). physically able.
Evidence from time budget and leisure participa- Since the 1970s, many young adults have failed
tion surveys in all parts of the world has confirmed to establish themselves in stable occupational careers
repeatedly that youth and young adulthood are the by their mid and even late twenties. Simultaneously,
life stages when people have the most time and more have been progressing through higher educa-
money for leisure spending and activities, and there- tion, and students are a sociodemographic group in
fore when participation rates peak in most forms of which rates of leisure interest, taste and skill forma-
out-of-home leisure. This is typically followed by the tion are exceptionally high. The long-term leisure
squeeze, and leisure becomes family-centred, home- implications of these trends – the cohort and possi-
centred and TV-dominated. bly generation effects – remain to be explored.
In recent years, there has been an upsurge of
interest in leisure in later life; a response to increased Leisure and well-being
longevity, the super-sized baby boomer cohorts In leisure studies (rather than just the sociology of
approaching and now entering later life, and evi- leisure) the leading theories in recent years have been
dence (see also below) that leisure activities are espe- about whether, and if so how, leisure can improve
cially beneficial for the well-being of older people personal well-being. So we now know how leisure
since satisfiers connected with work and family roles can be a source of ‘optimal experience’, what
are less likely to operate. Csikzentmihalyi (1990) calls ‘flow’. We know about
the special satisfactions that arise from serious leisure
Leisure biographies: Some of the most (Stebbins, 1992). We also know that all uses of
thought-provoking research findings have been from leisure raise levels of self-reported life satisfaction
studies that have traced individuals’ leisure biogra- provided the leisure is active (takes people out of
phies, sometimes with retrospective data (there can their homes), social rather than solitary, and struc-
be recall problems) and sometimes with panel meth- tured so that the behaviour can become routine,
ods. These studies have revealed powerful long-term making personal motivation on each occasion
continuities in leisure interests and activities. People unnecessary. These same uses of leisure also improve
who play sport in late-adulthood, and those who physical health, but here physically active leisure is
hold office in voluntary associations during this life especially beneficial (see Isao-Ahola and Mannell,
stage, were typically playing these same roles (though 2004). The life satisfaction benefits appear to arise
not necessarily in the same sports or associations) from what psychologists call ‘basic categories of
when they were young adults (McGuire et al., 1987; experience’: doing something rather than nothing,
Mihalik et al., 1989; Roberts et al., 1991; Scott and interacting with other people and achieving a goal,
Willits, 1989). Childhood and youth are the prime especially if this requires collective effort.
life stages when individuals form leisure interests and
acquire basic skills. They may lapse, in which case Leisure and status attainment
they are less likely to resume than are those who have Sociologists have also been concerned about the role
been continuously remained active. of leisure, if any, in lifetime status attainment. There
are never-ending leisure projects to save youth
A ge, cohort and generation: Current and judged to be at risk, excluded or impeded by multi-
earlier cohorts of older people were children at a time ple disadvantages. Although many of these projects
when opportunities to form leisure interests and to are monitored and can usually produce enough signs
practise the activities were far fewer than today. So of positive outcomes to secure continued funding,
the low rates of leisure participation in current older the social science verdict is that the evidence remains

7
Roberts Sociology of leisure

inconclusive (see Coalter, 2007; Collins and Kay, The case for discrimination is equally strong with
2003). However, evidence from longitudinal other claims about the role of leisure in society.
research in the UK shows that, in recent decades, Leisure goods and services may strengthen national
teenage involvement in some leisure activities has or local prestige and identities, but this will apply
been associated with statistically significant positive only to particular goods and services, under specific
labour market and social outcomes at age 30 circumstances, and perhaps just for specific sections
(Feinstein et al., 2006; Robson, 2003). Involvement of a population. Leisure may strengthen citizenship
in the arts, sport, church and community organiza- when facilities manifestly belong to and are accessi-
tions, though not youth clubs, appears to have been ble by all sections of a public (libraries, museums,
beneficial, but the processes that are responsible countryside, etc.), and when leisure binds people
remain unclear. They could be via the acquisition of together in trust relationships, thereby boosting
human, social or cultural capital. Whether it will be social capital. Leisure provisions can be a source of
worthwhile to try to identify the crucial process or economic growth and jobs, but for this to happen
processes is debatable since the role of leisure in sta- investment and consumer spending need to be
tus attainment is minor compared with family ori- drawn into a territory. With all these claims it is nec-
gins and achievements in education. essary to specify what kind of leisure, under what cir-
cumstances and for whom. This is one of the
The societal role of leisure challenges for the sociology of leisure to address,
Parsonian functionalism gave leisure a latency role – which will mean abandoning grand claims about the
allowing pent-up emotions and other otherwise sup- role of leisure in society in favour of specifying the
pressed drives in personality systems to be expressed types of leisure, for whom and in what contexts.
(Parsons, 1951). The Frankfurt School’s critique of
the culture industry claimed that its role was to paci- Leisure and comparat ive sociology
fy a potentially rebellious working class (see The comparative sociology of leisure remains in a
Bottomore, 1984). More recent neo-Marxist cri- prolonged infancy. The earliest and the most recent
tiques of the consumer society deploy a similar argu- comparative studies have simply drawn together
ment about consumer culture’s soothing balm accounts of leisure in their countries by country-
(Baudrillard, 1998). based authors, writing to a common template
Joffre Dumazedier (1967, 1974), the first presi- (Cushman et al., 2005; Szalai, 1972). The European
dent of RC13, had different ideas. As leisure grew in Time Use Survey (see MacInnes, 2006) has made
scale it was expected to play a stronger role in socie- progress in harmonizing data, but only for a limited
ty. Specifically, Dumazedier treated leisure as a number of European countries, and the evidence is
source of values (choosing and doing things for the purely quantitative.
intrinsic satisfaction) that he expected to invade Quantitative comparisons have found very simi-
other domains like workplaces and families. lar uses of leisure in all modern societies; the impres-
Subsequently, these ideas have been reformulated sive amounts of time spent watching TV, for
with ‘identity’ replacing ‘values’ as the central con- example. These comparisons have also found similar
cept. Postmodern conditions are said to have weak- social class, gender and age differences in the distri-
ened modern structures and their associated roles bution of leisure time and participation in different
(occupational and gender roles, for example), where- leisure activities. This has made leisure (apparently)
as people are able to use consumer roles to tell them- one of sociology’s most naturally international spe-
selves and others who they are. cialisms. However, this may have been at the expense
It is always difficult to supply convincing evi- of ignoring cultural differences. Differences in the
dence when historical change is postulated since meanings of particular leisure activities, and of
there is rarely suitable benchmark data from times leisure itself, have been explored mainly in relation
past. One rigorous attempt to measure change in to gender (see earlier section). Cultural differences
sources of identity in Australia has concluded that have also been noted in studies of immigrant groups
the continuities are more impressive: occupations, and indigenous minorities in western countries.
family roles and nationality continue to be Since the 1960s, the sociology of leisure has been
Australians’ most important identities (Phillips and developed mainly by western scholars, and those
Western, 2005). However, it is likely than any socie- based in other parts of the world have been more
tal role will always depend on the type of leisure and likely to adopt than to challenge western sociology’s
the other roles of the actors or consumers. Leisure definitions and classifications of leisure activities.
may play a strong role in identity stabilization dur- However, leisure is now being studied by sociologists
ing a certain life stage such as youth, then recede in in all parts of the world: in Eastern Europe, Africa,
importance. the Middle East, Latin America and especially in the

8
Roberts Sociology of leisure

Asian countries that are becoming major global eco- tary resources on which current first world lifestyles
nomic centres (see Amaral, 2008; Eglite, 2007; Jain, depend will one day be exhausted. Sociology in gen-
2007; Qiyan Wang, 2007; Saad, 2007; Tsai, 2008). eral, not just the sociology of leisure, has become
It is noteworthy that the cultural specificities of west- cautious. Today we know that the basic new tech-
ern leisure are currently being highlighted by schol- nologies that gave us radio, movies, television, motor
ars from, or writing about leisure in India, Japan and and air transport had all been invented before or
China (Fox and Klaiber, 2006; Iwasaki et al., 2007; soon following the end of the 19th century, yet at
Ma Huidi and Liu Er, 2009). that time few could envisage how these technologies
Maybe in the long term the global market econ- would be used 50 years later. Also, we know that
omy will create a singular modernity, but we are cur- many future forecasts made in the mid-20th century
rently in an era of multiple modernities, and have been confounded. One point on which we feel
engaging more thoroughly, and more even-handedly, confident is the frailty of our ability to predict.
with these differences should help to shed light on Grappling with the present seems sufficient chal-
the role of leisure in modern societies, especially as lenge.
regards specifying in what circumstances particular Sociologists of leisure know that their sub-disci-
societal outcomes arise. pline needs theoretical renewal. Building squarely on
the foundations already laid cannot be sufficient
given that these foundations have always been sub-
Assessment, prospects, future ject to criticism (see, in particular, Rojek, 1985,
directions 1995, 2000, 2005, 2009). Uses of leisure themselves
change constantly, albeit slowly throughout most
The sociology of leisure was established as a collec- decades. Also, in sociology, with our desire to set
tive enterprise at a time when major new technolo- everything in its wider context, we know that focus-
gies of the early and mid-20th century had already ing exclusively on leisure itself will cripple our
changed, or had already begun to change, people’s endeavours, that the likely ramifications for leisure of
lives in first world countries – radio, movies, record- all the new technologies need to be addressed, and
ed music, television, the motor car and air travel. existing sociological (as opposed to common sense
The relevant changes were occurring at a time when and industrial) classifications of leisure activities
paid work schedules were contracting, and when dis- need to be used more widely and properly interro-
posable incomes (not required for essentials) were gated. In addition, just as in the 1960s, the sociolo-
growing. This was the context in which sociology gy of leisure needs to draw on broader sociological
was debating the affluent society and the possible theories about changes in 21st-century societies. For
embourgeoisement of the proletariat. The wider field example:
of leisure studies relied heavily on sociology for the-
ories to make sense of how people were using their • The kinds of work–life balance and imbal-
increased free time and spending power. As ances experienced by different sociodemographic
explained earlier, the emergent sociology of leisure groups in different countries.
was able to draw on occupational sociology’s insights • The implications for patterns of stratification
about the ‘long arm of the job’, and information of changes in the distribution and types of eco-
about people’s daily lives as reported in studies of nomic, social and cultural assets.
families and neighbourhood communities. During • The long-term implications of past and cur-
subsequent decades, sociology continued to inject rent changes in leisure socialization during child-
theories into leisure studies – symbolic interactionist hood, youth and young adulthood.
perspectives, Marxism, feminism and debates about • The consequences for leisure behaviour and
the likely character of an emergent post-industrial social identities of the growth of commercial con-
age. sumer industries and the spread of the associated
The present-day sociology of leisure has far less to consumer cultures.
say about the future than was the case in the 1960s • The implications of governments looking
and 1970s. This is despite the arrival of another gen- increasingly towards the leisure industries to pro-
eration of new technologies – the information and mote economic growth, or to prevent stagnation
communication technologies – that have delivered or degeneration.
multi-channel television, personal computers,
mobile phones-plus and the internet. It is also It is likely that some of the most exciting, para-
despite confident predictions of climate change that digm shattering and generating sociological work on
will be only ameliorated by changes in how we pro- leisure will forthwith be conducted outside the first
duce and consume, and knowledge that the plane- world countries where the sub-discipline was born.

9
Roberts Sociology of leisure

As explained earlier, the sociology of leisure is now University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press.
The ways in which Americans use their time have
taught and researched in all parts of the world, not surprised many sociologists, but this book soon
though we should probably make a distinction became, and has remained, an essential source. The
between research which adopts western perspectives book charted changes and continuities in how
and questions from contributions where the think- Americans use time from time budget research con-
ing is locally rooted. Are new technologies and the ducted in different years since the 1960s. The book
global market economy strengthening the cultural identified a trend towards genderless leisure. It reject-
imperialism of the old west? Or are 21st-century ed claims that Americans were working longer than
developments enabling traditional cultures to be re- in the past, or exceptionally long hours by global
invigorated and asserted? Are the new industrial yardsticks.
countries, and the new market economies of Eastern Rapoport R, Rapoport RN (1975) Leisure and the Family
Europe and Eurasia, still catching up, or are late- Life-Cycle. London: Routledge.
The first study that related leisure to the family life-
development effects propelling these countries ahead cycle rather than simply to age. The authors’ own
in certain respects? Leisure is a site where issues of research in London revealed how different life-cycle
much wider interest within and beyond sociology stages, interacting with employment careers, bred
can be explored. characteristic interests and preoccupations, and hence
leisure behaviour.
Schor JB (1991) The Overworked American. New York:
Annotated further reading Basic Books.
A landmark book, whose central claim was that
Blackshaw T (2003) Leisure Life: Myth, Masculinity and working time was lengthening in the USA. This
Modernity. London: Routledge. claim was subsequently disputed, but Schor’s book
One of the few books from men’s studies that focuses propelled work–life balance and overwork into issues
upon men’s leisure. It describes, with detailed ethno- that were soon being debated and investigated all
graphic evidence, how working-class males in a de- over the world.
industrialized city were using leisure to maintain Scott D, Willits FK (1989) Adolescent and adult leisure
traditional masculine identities. patterns: A 37 year follow-up study. Leisure Sciences
Dumazedier J (1967) Towards a Society of Leisure. New 11: 323–35.
York: Free Press. A seminal paper which reported impressive individ-
The foundation text by the founding father of the ual-level continuities in uses of leisure among a US
sociology of leisure. This book charted the historical sample who were followed up after being initially
growth of leisure time, identified values associated investigated 37 years previously.
with leisure, and envisaged these values becoming Stebbins RA (1992) Amateurs, Professionals and Serious
increasingly powerful in a not-too-distant society of Leisure. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press.
leisure. This is the book that successfully launched ‘serious
Green E, Hebron S, and Woodward D (1990) Women’s leisure’ as an analytic concept. It illustrates serious
Leisure, What Leisure? London: Macmillan. leisure from the author’s own studies of a variety of
The publication – among many contemporaries also volunteers, hobbyists and amateurs – people who
claiming that women at leisure were the disadvan- were taking their leisure just as seriously as, and
taged sex – that was distinguished by marshalling sometimes achieving equally high standards to, pro-
impressive quantitative and qualitative evidence from fessionals in their fields.
research in Sheffield, UK.
Parker S (1971) The Future of Work and Leisure. London:
MacGibbon and Kee. References
This book presented the results of the author’s own
research among social workers and bank clerks, set Amaral SCF (2008) Public leisure policies in Porto
this evidence alongside findings from other research, Alegre, Brazil: From representative democracy to par-
and developed an influential typology of ticipant democracy. World Leisure Journal 50(2):
work–leisure relationships: extension, opposition and 127–37.
neutrality. Barrell G, Chamberlain A, Evans J, Holt T, and
Peterson RA, Kern RM (1996) Changing highbrow Mackean J (1989) Ideology and commitment in fam-
taste: From snob to omnivore. American Sociological ily life: The case of runners. Leisure Studies 8:
Review 61: 900–7. 249–62.
The paper that discovered the middle-class leisure Baudrillard J (1998) The Consumer Society. London:
omnivore, and explained how omnivores’ diverse Sage.
tastes could simultaneously divide and unite the mid- Bauman Z (1998) Work, Consumerism and the New Poor.
dle classes. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Robinson JP, Godbey G (1999) Time for Life: The Best F (1978) The time of our lives. Society and Leisure
Surprising Ways Americans Use Their Time, 2nd edn. 1: 95–114.

10
Roberts Sociology of leisure

Bittman M, Wajcman J (1999) The rush hour: The qual- Leisure, What Leisure? Macmillan: London.
ity of leisure time and gender equity. SPRC Gregory S (1982) Women among others: Another view.
Discussion Paper 97, University of New South Wales. Leisure Studies 1: 47–52.
Blackshaw T (2003) Leisure Life: Myth, Masculinity and Havitz ME, Morden PA, and Samdahl DM (2004) The
Modernity. London: Routledge. Diverse Worlds of Unemployed Adults: Consequences for
Bottomore T (1984) The Frankfurt School. London: Leisure, Lifestyle and Well-Being. Waterloo, Ontario:
Tavistock. Wilfrid Laurier University Press.
Bourdieu P (1984) Distinction: A Social Critique of the Henderson K, Bialeschki MD, Shaw SC, and Freysinger
Judgement of Taste. London: Routledge. VJ (1989) A Leisure of One’s Own. State College, PA:
Burrows R, Gane N (2006) Geodemographics, software Venture.
and class. Sociology 40: 793–812. Hesmondhalgh D (2007) The Cultural Industries.
Cauldwell J (ed.) (2006) Sport, Sexualities and Queer London: Sage.
Theory. London: Routledge. Horning KH, Gerhard A, and Michailow M (1995)
Coalter F (2007) A Wider Role for Sport: Who’s Keeping Time Pioneers: Flexible Working Time and New
the Score? London: Routledge. Lifestyles. Cambridge: Polity Press.
Collins MF, with Kay T (2003) Sport and Social Isao-Ahola SE, Mannell RC (2004) Leisure and health.
Exclusion. London: Routledge. In: Haworth JT, Veal AJ (eds) Work and Leisure.
Csikszentmihalyi M (1990) Flow: The Psychology of London: Routledge, 184–99.
Optimal Experience. New York: Harper and Row. Iwasaki Y, Nishino H, Onda T, and Bowling C (2007)
Cushman G, Veal AJ, and Zuzanek J (eds) (2005) Free Leisure research in a global world: time to reverse the
Time and Leisure Participation: International western dominance in leisure research. Leisure
Perspectives. Wallingford: CABI. Sciences 29: 113–17.
Deem R (1986) All Work and No Play? Milton Keynes: Jain R (2007) Access to leisure: Impact of forces of liber-
Open University Press. alisation, privatisation and globalisation on socially
De Grazia S (1962) Of Time, Work and Leisure. New disadvantaged groups in India. World Leisure Journal
York: Twentieth Century Fund. 49(1): 15–23.
Dennis N, Henriques F, and Slaughter C (1956) Coal is Lenskyj H (1988) Measured time, women, sport and
Our Life. London: Eyre and Spottiswoode. leisure. Leisure Studies 7: 233–40.
Dumazedier J (1967) Towards a Society of Leisure. New Lewis S (2003) The integration of paid work and the rest
York: Free Press. of life: Is post-industrial work the new leisure? Leisure
Dumazedier J (1974) Sociology of Leisure. Amsterdam: Studies 22: 343–55.
Elsevier. Linder S (1970) The Harried Leisure Class. New York:
Eglite P (2007) Leisure choice and its fulfillment in Columbia University Press.
Latvia. World Leisure Journal 49(1): 24–9. Lundberg GA, Komarovsky M, and McInerny MA
Erikson BH (1996) Culture, class and connections. (1934) Leisure: A Suburban Study. New York:
American Journal of Sociology 102: 217–51. Columbia University Press.
Estes RJ, Wilenski H (1978) Life-cycle squeeze and the McGuire FA, Dottavio FD, and O’Leary J T (1987) The
morale curve. Institute of Industrial Relations, relationship of early life experiences to later life
Reprint 422, University of California, Berkeley. leisure involvement. Leisure Sciences 9: 251–7.
Feinstein L, Bynner J, and Duckworth K (2006) Young MacInnes J (2006) Work–life balance in Europe: A
people’s leisure contexts and their relationship to response to the baby bust or reward for the baby
adult outcomes. Journal of Youth Studies 9: 305–27. boomers. European Societies 8: 223–49.
Fox KM, Klaiber E (2006) Listening for a leisure remix. Ma Huidi, Liu Er (2009) Social transformation: The
Leisure Sciences 28: 411–30. value of traditional leisure culture of China revisited.
Friedmann G (1961) The Anatomy of Work London: World Leisure Journal 51: 3–13.
Heinemann. Mihalik BJ, O’Leary JT, Maguire FA, and Dottavio FD
Gershuny J (2003) Time through the lifecourse, in the (1989) Sports involvement across the life span:
family. Working Paper 2003-3, Institute for Social Expansion and contraction of sports activities.
and Economic Research, University of Essex, Research Quarterly for Exercise and Sport 60: 396–8.
Colchester. Neulinger J (1990) Eden After All. Culemborg: Giordano
Gershuny J (2005) Busyness as the badge of honour in Bruno.
the new superordinate working class. Working Paper Pahl J (1990) Household spending, personal spending
2005-09, Institute for Social and Economic and the control of money in marriage. Sociology 24:
Research, University of Essex, Colchester. 119–38.
Glyptis S (1989) Leisure and Unemployment. Milton Parker S (1971) The Future of Work and Leisure. London:
Keynes: Open University Press. MacGibbon and Kee.
Godbey G (1975) Anti-leisure and public recreation pol- Parsons T (1951) The Social System. London: Routledge.
icy. In: Parker S, et al. (eds) Sport and Leisure in Peterson RA, Kern RM (1996) Changing highbrow
Contemporary Society. London: Leisure Studies taste: From snob to omnivore. American Sociological
Association. Review 61: 900–7.
Green E, Hebron S, and Woodward D (1990) Women’s Phillips T, Western M (2005) Social change and social

11
Roberts Sociology of leisure

identity: Postmodernity, reflexive modernisation and Stebbins RA (2005) Project-based leisure: Theoretical
the transformation of social identities in Australia. neglect of a common use of free time. Leisure Studies
In: Devine F, Savage M, Scott J, and Crompton R 24: 1–11.
(eds) Rethinking Class: Culture, Identities, Lifestyle. Sweeting H, West P (2003) Young people’s leisure and
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 163–85. risk-taking behaviours: Change in gender patterning
Putnam RD (2000) Bowling Alone: The Collapse and in the West of Scotland during the 1990s. Journal of
Revival of American Community. New York: Simon Youth Studies 6: 391–412.
and Schuster. Szalai A (ed.) (1972) The Use of Time. The Hague:
Qiyan Wang (2007) A comparison of Chinese and Mouton.
Japanese leisure modes. World Leisure Journal 49(3): Tsai C-TL (2008) Gender and leisure: influencing school
142–54. PE policy in Taiwan. World Leisure Journal 50(4):
Rapoport R, Rapoport RN (1975) Leisure and the Family 275–84.
Life-Cycle. London: Routledge. Tunstall J (1962) The Fishermen. London: MacGibbon
Roberts K (2007) Work–life balance – the sources of the and Kee.
contemporary problem and the probable outcomes: Van den Broek A, Breedveld K, and Knulst W (2002)
A review and interpretation of the evidence. Employee Roles, rhythms and routines: Towards a new script of
Relations 29: 334–51. daily life in the Netherlands? In: Crowe G, Heath S
Roberts K, Minten J H, Chadwick C, Lamb KL, and (eds) Social Conceptions of Time: Structure and Process
Brodie DA (1991) Sporting lives: A case study of in Work and Everyday Life. Basingstoke: Palgrave,
leisure careers. Society and Leisure 14: 261–84. 195–214.
Robinson JP, Godbey G (1999) Time For Life: The Van Eijck K (1999) Socialisation, education and lifestyle:
Surprising Ways Americans Use Their Time, 2nd edn. How social mobility increases the cultural hetero-
University Park: Pennsylvania State University Press. geneity of status groups. Poetics 26: 309–28.
Robson K (2003) Teenage time use as investment in cul- Veal AJ (1993) The concept of lifestyle: A review. Leisure
tural capital. Working Paper 2003-12, Institute for Studies 12: 233–52.
Social and Economic Research, University of Essex, Veal AJ, Lynch R (1996) Australian Leisure. Melbourne:
Colchester. Addison Wesley Longman.
Roche M (2000) Mega-Events and Modernity. London: Veblen T (1970 [1899]), The Theory of the Leisure Class.
Routledge. London: Allen and Unwin.
Rojek C (1985) Capitalism and Leisure Theory. London: Vester M (2005) Class and culture in Germany. In:
Tavistock. Devine F, Savage M, Scott J, and Crompton R (eds)
Rojek C (1995) Decentring Leisure. London: Sage. Rethinking Class: Culture, Identities and Lifestyle.
Rojek C (2000) Leisure and Culture. Basingstoke: Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan, 69–94.
Macmillan. Warde A, Martens L, and Olsen W (1999)
Rojek C (2005) Leisure Theory: Principles and Practice. Consumption and the problem of variety: Cultural
Basingstoke: Palgrave Macmillan. omnivorousness, social distinction and dining out.
Rojek C (2009) The Labour of Leisure. London: Sage. Sociology 33: 105–27.
Saad NM (2007) Egyptian Moslem mothers and their Warhurst C, Nickson D (2007) Employee experience of
leisure patterns. World Leisure Journal 49(1): 44–51. aesthetic labour in retail and hospitality. Work,
Savage M, Barlow J, Dickens P, and Fielding T (1992) Employment and Society 21: 103–20.
Property, Bureaucracy and Culture. London: Wearing B (1998) Leisure and Feminist Theory. London:
Routledge. Sage.
Schor JB (1991) The Overworked American. New York: Wellard I (2002) Men, sport, body performance and the
Basic Books. maintenance of ‘exclusive masculinity’. Leisure Studies
Scott D, Willits FK (1989) Adolescent and adult leisure 21: 235–47.
patterns: A 37 year follow-up study. Leisure Sciences Whyte WH (1957) The Organization Man. New York:
11: 323–35. Anchor Books.
Seabrook J (1988) The Leisure Society. Oxford: Blackwell. Wilenski HL (1963) The uneven distribution of leisure:
Sintas JL, Alvarez EG (2002) Omnivores show up again: The impact of economic growth on ‘free time’. In:
The segmentation of cultural consumers in Spanish Smigel EO (ed.) Work and Leisure. New Haven, CT:
social space. European Sociological Review 18: College and University Press.
353–68. Wynne D (1998) Leisure, Lifestyle and the New Middle
Skeggs B (1999) Matter out of place: visibility and sexu- Class. London: Routledge.
ality in leisure spaces. Leisure Studies 213–32. Zuzanek J, Beckers T, and Peters P (1998) The harried
Stebbins RA (1992) Amateurs, Professionals and Serious leisure class revisited: A cross-national and longitudi-
Leisure. Montreal: McGill-Queens University Press. nal perspective. Dutch and Canadian trends in the
Stebbins RA (2001) The costs and benefits of hedonism: use of time: From the 1970s to the 1990s. Leisure
Some consequences of taking casual leisure seriously. Studies 17: 1–19.
Leisure Studies 20: 305–9.

12
Roberts Sociology of leisure

Ken Roberts is Professor of Sociology at the University of Liverpool. He is a former President


of ISA RC13 (Sociology of Leisure), a former chair of the World Leisure Organization’s
Research Commission, a founder and life member of the Leisure Studies Association and a sen-
ior fellow of the American Leisure Academy. His books include Leisure (1970, 1980),
Contemporary Society and the Growth of Leisure (1977), Leisure in Contemporary Society (1999,
2006) and The Leisure Industries (2004). [email: k.roberts@liverpool.ac.uk]

13

You might also like