Leisure Sciences, 24:219 – 235, 2002
C 2002 Taylor & Francis
Copyright °
0149-0400 /02 $12.00 + .00
Leisure as a Resource in Transcending Negative Life
Events: Self-Protection, Self-Restoration,
and Personal Transformation
DOUGLAS A. KLEIBER
University of Georgia
Athens, Georgia, USA
SUSAN L. HUTCHINSON
The Pennsylvania State University
University Park, Pennsylvania
RICHARD WILLIAMS
East Carolina University
Greenville, North Carolina
Negative life events, such as the unexpected loss of a loved one, a disabling accident or
a natural disaster, are inevitably distressing and disruptive. Coping with and recovering
from such events generally requires a variety of personal and social resources. Previous
research on leisure and coping has suggested that leisure orientations and relationships
can be important in reducing the likelihood that stress becomes debilitating in some
way. But the results of that work are equivocal and generally do not distinguish leisure
resources that make events less stressful from those that are employed in coping with
stressful events after they occur. This analysis examines the leisure-coping literature
as well as recent work on the dynamics of coping and the impact of pleasant events
and concludes in identifying four distinguishable functions of leisure that relate to selfprotection, self-restoration, and personal transformation.
Keywords
leisure, negative life events, stress, coping, adjustment
Rarely does one go through life with no surprises. Unexpected events can be either positive
or negative, but those that are negative—such as an injury, the death of a loved one, the loss
of a job, or the sudden onset of a serious illness, for example—are inevitably disruptive and
may even be catastrophic. Various human services have been structured to aid in coping with
such events, and psychologists and health professionals have also concerned themselves with
understanding the coping process itself and the conditions that in uence it. The premise of
this article is that leisure may be useful in a variety of ways in the coping and adjustment
process, some of which may even be growth-producing .1
Leisure has been well-studied as an in uence in coping with stress (e.g., Coleman,
1993; Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993; Iso-Ahola & Park, 1996; Iwasaki & Smale, 1998;
Received 3 March 2001; accepted 11 October 2001.
Address correspondenc e to Douglas A. Kleiber, School of Health and Human Performance, 303 Ramsey
Center, University of Georgia, 300 River Road, Athens, GA 30602-6552 . E-mail: [email protected] u
219
220
D. A. Kleiber et al.
Iwasaki & Mannell, 2000a, 2000b), and we will review that literature in relation to coping
with negative life events. Our view, though, is that far more attention has been given to
the advantages of leisure-related skills and orientations in inoculating one to the effects of
stress than to the value of leisure experience in coping with stress once it has been induced.
Recent work on the nature of coping (e.g., Folkman, 1997; Lazarus, 1999) suggests that
leisure experiences can aid in coping with induced stress in ways that are self-protective,
self-restorative, and, ultimately, personally transformative. Before turning to this work and
a series of propositions about leisure that derive from it, a closer examination of the effects
of negative life events is required. Thus, we have organized the discussion into two main
sections. In the Ž rst, we review the literature on coping with negative life events, discussing
the impact of negative life events, the relationship between leisure, stress, and coping, and
the power of pleasant events in the coping and adjustment process. In the second section, we
offer four propositions addressing the functions of leisure in transcending negative events.
Coping with Negative Life Events
The following section is divided into three parts. First, we review literature related to the
disruptions that occur as a result of negative life events. Next, the extant literature related to
the role of leisure in coping with stress caused by negative life events is discussed. Finally,
we review literature speciŽ cally concerned with the dynamics of coping and the in uence
of pleasant events in the coping process.
Negative Life Events: Disruption and Adaptation
For decades, researchers in social psychology have been interested in understanding how
negative life events and other social stressors produce psychological distress and other types
of social dysfunction and health problems (e.g., Snyder & Ford, 1987). What is considered a
negative life event, however, is often a matter of individual differences (Snyder, Ford, &
Harris, 1987). For one person, being rejected by a love interest may precipitate a severe and
long lasting emotional and psychological reaction while someone else may be undaunted and
feel “lucky to be alive” in spite of a severe physical impairment resulting from an automobile
accident. Perceptions play a powerful role in deŽ ning negative life events. Assumptions
about the real and the ideal shape the way people perceive crises in their lives and the
possibilities for recovery from them. But disruption and stress are inevitable characteristics
of all such events.
Although there are many sources of stress, negative life events offer extremes in stressproducing conditions that have existential as well as physiological parameters. The death of
a child, a disabling injury, and the unexpected termination of a job differ in many respects,
but they share, as do most negative life events, the experience of disruption and loss with
which the individual must learn to cope. Disruptions of roles, relationships, preferred activities, and even attitudes toward the future are to be expected. Janoff-Bulman and Timko
(1985) wrote about one’s shattered assumptions in the wake of traumatic loss. In almost all
cases, negative life events demand a certain amount of “narrative reconstruction” (Williams,
1984) in which a new future is envisioned that accommodates the remembered past and the
anticipated future to the loss experienced. This often involves scaling down expectations and
aspirations and accepting various kinds of limitations. In some cases, however, the negative
event leads to positive changes that actually improve a person’s vision of the future. In fact,
researchers have begun to document the conditions under which negative events lead to “post
traumatic growth” (Tedeschi, Park, & Calhoun, 1998). According to Tedeschi and others,
the changes that bring about post traumatic growth commonly include changed perceptions
Transcending Negative Life Events
221
of self (e.g., survivor rather than victim; imminently mortal) and changed interpersonal relationships (e.g., more emotionally expressive and compassionate), but they are also likely to
re ect a greater appreciation of the smaller things in life and a desire to make the most of the
moments available. Leisure would seem to be an important context for such transformative
experiences.
Such possibilities notwithstanding, leisure is more likely to be a casualty of negative
life events than a solution for coping with them, at least initially. The loss of leisurerelated abilities and relationships actually deŽ ne the “illness experience” in some cases
(Hutchinson, 1996; Kleiber, Brock, Dattilo, Lee, & Caldwell, 1995; Yaffe, 1998). The loss
of a spouse, for example, is frequently felt most painfully in the lost leisure companionship
that he or she provided (Ashton-Shaeffer, 1995; Lopata, 1993; Patterson, 1996). In coping
with this loss of leisure relationships, Iwasaki and Smale (1998) found that women who
became windows placed less importance on socializing, perhaps showing the tendency to
disengage more generally as a consequence. In many situations associated with unexpected
loss, people feel they do not deserve enjoyment (e.g., Henderson, Bedini, Hecht, & Shuler,
1995). For example, the loss of a job reduces a person’s sense of entitlement to leisure and
creates feelings of social embarrassment, particularly in social situations where discussions
of work occur (Lobo, 1996). Leisure can even be perceived as a burden or a threat in such
situations (e.g., Weinblatt & Navon, 1993; Yaffe, 1996).
While such results may be enduring effects of negative life events, the research on
post traumatic growth suggests that leisure may be redeemed in time, and in some cases
sooner than later. When a crisis becomes an occasion for reappraising one’s self, life, values,
and goals, it often culminates in greater openness to and appreciation of experience, other
people, and leisure as well. Janoff-Bulman and Berger (2000) point out that people do not
make such changes “in spite of their losses and sense of vulnerability, but because of them”
(p. 39). In fact, many people have insisted that their injury or illness was the best thing
that ever happened to them (Aldwin, 1994; Csikszentmihalyi, 1990; Tedeschi et al., 1998;
Van Tigham, 2001). Researchers on post traumatic growth (Tedeschi et al., 1998) have
concerned themselves primarily with the personality attributes that predispose a person to
positive reappraisal (much as leisure researchers have done in charting the leisure-coping
relationship) or with the changes in the individual as a result of the experience; but relatively
little attention has been given to the dynamics of positive reappraisal itself and the coping
mechanisms that foster it. A notable exception, however—and one which implicates leisure
in the process—is the recent work of Susan Folkman (1997; Folkman & Moskowitz, 2000;
Folkman, Moskowitz, Ozer, & Park, 1997), a student and colleague of one of the leading
researchers on stress, Richard Lazarus (cf. Lazarus, 1999; Lazarus & Folkman, 1984).
Working with caregivers of people diagnosed with AIDS, Folkman and her colleagues
(Folkman, 1997; Folkman & Moskowitz, 2000) documented the importance of positive
events (e.g., laughter, enjoyment, pleasurable insights, uplifting messages) for precipitating
positive reappraisal and thus sustaining coping efforts in the face of high levels of ongoing
stress. While such experiences may not actually be regarded as leisure at the time, they are
signiŽ cant in demonstrating the importance of positive affect in the coping process and in
suggesting one of the ways leisure experience may serve as an important coping resource.
Leisure, Stress and Coping
The relationship between leisure, stress, and coping described in the extant literature remains unclear. Research on the relationship between leisure and stress has generally placed
leisure as a buffer between stressful elements in one’s environment and the tendency to succumb to that stress and develop symptoms of illness, both physically and psychologically.
222
D. A. Kleiber et al.
(See Iwasaki & Smale, 1998, for a recent review of this literature.) The stress-buffering
hypothesis (Coleman, 1993; Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993) is the underpinning for much of
this work and is consistent with the contention that leisure can help people cope with stressors
associated with unemployment (e.g., Haworth & Ducker, 1991; Shamir, 1986; WineŽ eld,
Tiggemann, & WineŽ eld, 1992), social role changes (e.g., Henderson, Bialeschki, Shaw, &
Freysinger, 1989), and signiŽ cant changes across the life span (Iso-Ahola, Jackson, & Dunn,
1994; Kelly, Steinkamp, & Kelly, 1987; Kleiber, 1999). But the data related to the leisure-asbuffer hypothesis are equivocal, and the relationship seems to be complicated. While there
is some evidence that leisure activity does indeed moderate the impact of stressful events
on various symptoms (e.g., Wheeler & Frank, 1988), just how that happens is unclear.
Among the more common explanations are that activity involvement confers a kind
of inoculating competence and, when social, provides the support necessary to endure
and manage stress (Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993). But evidence indicates that activities
often differ in both their purposes and their effects with respect to stress buffering (e.g.,
Caltabiano, 1988, 1994, 1995). Physical activities in particular have long been valued for
their impact on physical and emotional well being (e.g., Ulrich, Dimberg, & Driver, 1991),
but they do not seem to be a consistently in uential force in buffering the impact of stressful
circumstances. Indeed, there is evidence that physical activities may even contribute to
stress in some situations, especially where there are concerns about competent performance
(Caltabiano, 1995; Zuzanek, Robinson, & Iwasaki, 1998).
Evidence for the social support hypothesis is also ambiguous. Leisure, in its companionate and friendship forms, and through social activities, clearly has the potential to provide people with feelings of social support and a decreased sense of loneliness and isolation
(Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993). Iso-Ahola and Park (1996) found that leisure companionship
moderated the effect of life stress on mental health (depressive symptoms) and that leisurebased friendships moderated the effect of life stress on physical health (illness-related symptoms). SpeciŽ cally, depression and illness symptoms did not increase as much with high
levels of life stress for those people who reported higher levels of leisure companionship
or leisure friendships. This is consistent with other research demonstrating that a repertoire
of shared leisure activities can buffer life stress (Bolger & Eckenrode, 1991; Rook, 1987).
What is not clear from the research, however, is whether it is the preexisting leisurebased relationships that buffer the effects of stress or whether it is involvement in social
activities subsequent to the occurrence of stressful life events that makes the difference.
Indeed, the same activities that provided friends and companions before the life-altering
event may become painful reminders of one’s changed life circumstances. Such effects are
suggested in research by Caltabiano (1988, 1995) who found that minimal levels of social
leisure after distressful events buffered deleterious effects while high levels of social leisure
actually increased illness symptoms. Coleman and Iso-Ahola (1993) also noted that while
leisure-based social support may be perceived as a resource in times of high stress, high
levels of social support may also lead to feelings of dependency or perceptions of lack of
control and competence. Apparently, social leisure may be counterproductive in creating
too much togetherness, overexposing one’s vulnerabilities or reinforcing some degree of
dependency (Caltabiano, 1995). Getting away from others may at times be the wiser course.
Causality is also often a question in the stress and leisure activity research. Activity involvement may mitigate the in uence of stress on illness, but it may also be the case that those
who have endured well are more likely to be involed. Such ambiguity notwithstanding, the
intuitive appeal of arguments that leisure “soothes the soul” in a variety of ways still persists.
The challenge is mostly to determine how and when. As Iwasaki and Smale (1998) pointed
out, “focus on the transaction process, context and meaning seems to be an important alternative to the conventional buffer hypothesis, which provides only a static explanation and
Transcending Negative Life Events
223
pays little attention to dynamic processes underlying how coping resources in uence stresshealth relationships” (p. 48). From our perspective, understanding the context and meaning
of the stress-leisure-coping experiences requires attention to the particular life story that is
evolving for an affected individual and how disruption in that personal narrative is resolved.
An important advance over past research on leisure and coping is the recent work of
Iwasaki and Mannell (Iwasaki, 2001; Iwasaki & Mannell, 2000a, 2000b). These investigators have differentiated leisure-related beliefs in coping from leisure coping strategies
(2000a) and have addressed some of the complexities in the coping process (2000b). For
example, they found that those who generally saw the value of leisure for empowerment and
friendship were less affected by the daily hassles that negatively affected the mental health of
others. Also, those using leisure experiences more regularly for escape or to create positive
moods in the wake of academic stress had fewer of the feelings of harm that seemed to de ate
psychological well being, whereas those with higher interpersonal stress used leisure instrumentally to compensate for feelings of lower self-esteem that undermined mental health.
And, as suggested above, they found that using leisure activities to create companionship
seemed to have negative as well as some positive effects in the coping process.
Iwasaki and Mannell found relatively little support for the “buffering” interpretation
embraced by others (e.g., Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993) which asserts that the effects of
leisure on stress only hold at higher levels of stress. Their evidence indicated that leisurerelated factors mediated the impact of stress at all levels in both direct and indirect ways.2
But while they incorporated an assessment of major life events into their model (2000b),
their sample consisted of students currently in school rather than individuals who had
recently experienced serious negative life events. And while they were able to tease out
some of the dynamics of the effects of leisure in coping by means of survey measures, they
did not attempt to, nor would their methods have enabled them to, fully contextualize the
personal meaning of those events and the actions taken to cope with them. Still, Iwasaki and
Mannell have provided some important leads, particularly in differentiating leisure coping
beliefs from leisure coping strategies. We seek here to expand on that work and offer several
speciŽ c propositions for how leisure may be a resource in coping. However, to do so, we
also must pay closer attention to the recent research by Folkman, Lazarus and others on
pleasant events in the coping process.
The Role of Pleasant Events in Coping
“Coping” is the attempt to lessen physical and/or psychological stress or negative feelings
associated with problematic circumstances (Houston, 1987; Snyder et al., 1987). According
to Lazarus and Folkman (1984) coping is a process of appraisal and reappraisal in response
to shifts in the person-situation relationship. Evaluation of a situation leads to appraisal
of loss, threat, or challenge, which in turn in uences evaluation of coping resources and
the options that might be available in situations appraised to be threatening or challenging.
When appraisal and reappraisal involves rational thought and at least the contemplation of
action to reduce the negative impacts of a situation or event it is considered problem-focused
coping. Problem-focused coping efforts are often directed at deŽ ning the problem, generating alternative solutions, and weighing alternatives for their costs and beneŽ ts. Efforts may
be directed at making changes in the environment, or they may be directed inward. Inwarddirected strategies involve processes of cognitive reappraisal. Strategies such as shifting
one’s level of aspiration, Ž nding alternative channels of gratiŽ cation, and developing new
standards of behavior are examples of cognitive reappraisal.
Initially, however, especially where a negative event is unexpected, coping is more
likely to be emotion-focused, or palliative, which is largely a matter of Ž nding ways to
224
D. A. Kleiber et al.
avoid thinking about the threat or simply surviving the pain. Emotion-focused coping regulates the emotions associated with the trauma without attempting to change the situation
itself. Denial, avoidance, minimizing, regulating one’s emotions (e.g., keeping a “stiff upper
lip”), distancing, discharging one’s emotions (e.g., crying or “venting” with others), and resigned acceptance are common emotion-focused coping strategies used to lessen emotional
distress. While it may be argued that leisure only becomes a consideration after emotions
have come under some control, our contention here is that aspects of leisure are relevant to
both types of coping.
By contrasting problem- and emotion-focused coping, errors occur in the way we
understand (and value) coping strategies. “In a culture centered on control over the environment,” Lazarus (1999) points out, “it is easy to come to the erroneous conclusion—
which is common in the coping literature—that problem-focused coping is always a more
useful strategy” (p. 123). In fact, he argues, emotion- and problem-focused coping cooccur in most stressful situations; one is not better than the other, and both are necessary
in the coping process. “In nature the two functions of coping are seldom if ever separated. Both are essential parts of the total effort, and ideally, each facilitates the other”
(p. 123).
The early work by Lazarus, Kanner, and Folkman (1980) on the role of positively-toned
emotions suggests an important place for leisure experience in both emotion-focused and
problem-focused coping. Positively-toned emotions, according to Lazarus and others may
be mediators of coping as well as the product or result of coping efforts:
There are at least two ways that arousal in positively toned emotions enhances
subsequent efforts required by long-range commitments and goals. Positive arousal
can stimulate or even inspire the effort necessary to turn toward another task.
Moreover, the effects of positive arousal on subsequent efforts are not limited to
the onset of new endeavors, for the recollection of positive emotional experiences
during particularly trying undertakings can re-inspire efforts and restore beliefs in
self-efŽ cacy. These ideas are central to the role played by positive emotions in the
coping process. (p. 205)
According to Lazarus and others (1980), positively-toned emotions serve three psychological functions in coping: as “breathers” from stress, as “sustainers” of coping effort and
commitment, and as “restorers.” The purpose of a breather is “not only to free oneself temporarily from a stressful experience, but also to engage in pleasurable diversionary activity”
(Lazarus et al., p. 208). Positively-toned emotions, such as excitement, hope, or challenge,
also serve to sustain coping efforts, “even when situations become very taxing” (p. 209).
Finally, positively-toned emotions may have the effect of restoring hope or self-esteem.
“Restorers are positively toned emotional experiences that facilitate the individual’s recovery from harm or loss by replenishing damaged or depleted resources and/or developing
new ones” (Lazarus et al., 1980, p. 211). Lazarus and others (1980) suggested that restorative experiences (e.g., experiencing small successes) facilitate hope and the appreciation
of new opportunities and alleviate depression. They speculated that enjoyable experiences
that do not require too much risk may serve to break a depressive mind set and remind
the person of other, more pleasant ways of experiencing and appraising her or his world.
Further research is clearly needed on such patterns, but the studies of Lazarus and Folkman
and their colleagues suggest that the potential for leisure to generate positive emotion may
give it a special role in facilitating effective coping and adjustment in the wake of a negative
life events. It is in the progression of such experiences from emotion- and problem-focused
coping to self-restoration and transformation that we Ž nd four distinguishable functions for
leisure in the course of adjustment.3
Transcending Negative Life Events
225
Four Functions of Leisure in Transcending Negative Life Events
The studies of Lazarus and Folkman and their colleagues indicate a clear role for leisure
in coping with the stress created by negative life events, particularly in the subtle and brief
experiences that infuse positive emotions into one’s existence. These moments may be
more re ective of the “interstitial” forms of leisure (Kelly, 1987) that Ž nd their way into
everyday life than the “serious” forms of high investment leisure activities (cf. Kelly et al.,
1987; Mannell, 1993; Stebbins, 1992). But both forms of leisure need to be examined for
their healing and growth potential. Such experiences seem to point the way to using leisure
not only to relieve the stress associated with a negative life event, but also to use leisure
more instrumentally in reconstructing a life that may recover the best of what was lost or
may offer new roads to happiness and well being.
The complexity of the leisure-coping relationship is thus created in part by the complexity of leisure itself. From playful and humorous social banter to re ective relaxation,
from captivating diversions to intense and serious investment in skill-demanding activities,
the possibilities are numerous. Based on the foregoing review of research on leisure and
stress, pleasant events in the coping process, and post traumatic growth, we suggest that
leisure is a resource for the self-protective effects of emotion-focused and problem-focused
coping, and that such experience may be the foundation for adjustment and personal growth
following a negative life event.
In this section we will introduce four separate functions of leisure, two related primarily
to coping and two that identify the role of leisure in bringing about a more complete course
of adjustment. When leisure is used for emotion-focused and problem-focused coping it
is essentially self-protective. When coping is largely successful, some degree of narrative
reconstruction is possible which results in self-restoration, or personal transformation, or
both. Thus we consider four propositions, two having to do with appropriation of leisure in
patterns of self-protection and two addressing the appropriation of leisure for self-restoration
and personal transformation.
Appropriation of Leisure in Patterns of Self-Protection
As was noted earlier, the impact of a negative life event is often overwhelming. The Ž rst
task therefore is to create some stability and control by reducing, de ecting, and managing
the distress. Distracting activities and relationships often serve that function. Subsequently,
positive events and experiences may have a buoying effect, raising optimism and courage
about the prospects for taking control, and Ž nding solutions to the problems directly.
Proposition 1: Leisure Activities Buffer the Impact of Negative Life Events
by Being Distracting
Leisure and leisure activity may be virtually inconceivable in the Ž rst instance to a
person who has experienced a traumatic negative life event. Nevertheless, the threat of being
overwhelmed by negative emotions often directs people to activities that are distracting in
some way. Both positive and negative forms of leisure activity enable one to avoid or create
distance from stressful circumstances. Watching television, listening to music, using drugs
and alcohol, sleeping, playing with video games, playing with a pet, exercising, eating,
shopping, engaging in sex, and other forms of diversion are emotion-focused strategies
used to keep one’s mind off the problem and reduce the negative feelings that are associated
with negative life events and resulting stressors. As Houston (1987) suggested, what all of
these have in common is that they divert one’s attention from negative feelings and their
cause and supplant them with neutral or positive feelings, which may, in time, stimulate
reinterpretation of the situation in question.
226
D. A. Kleiber et al.
While these activities may not be experienced as “pure” leisure (i.e., as self-determined,
intrinsically motivated) there is relative freedom in the ability to experience some choice
and control, if only to create a temporary separation from the stressors associated with
the negative life event. This temporary suspension of attention to the negative life event
is palliative in generating positive emotions and in distancing oneself from the losses associated with the event (Folkman & Moskowitz, 2000). For example, in a recent study of
individuals who had acquired a spinal cord injury, many spoke of the need to keep busy
to keep their minds off their worries (Kleiber, Dattilo, Loy, & Hutchinson, 2001). Others
spoke of their need to escape the restrictions of their bodies (e.g., by having a bath or
going swimming) or to be in social situations where evidence of their disabilities was minimized. These uses of leisure as a coping resource are suggestive of Lazarus and others’
(1980) proposition that positively-toned emotions serve as breathers from stress. Similarly,
Iwasaki and Mannell (2000a) found evidence of two leisure coping strategies in their study
of university students that are indicative of the distracting potential of leisure. In particular, leisure palliative coping (“a temporal break through leisure which allows people to
feel refreshed and regroup to better handle problems”; Iwasaki, 2001, p. 131) and leisure
mood enhancement (“the enhancement of positive mood or the reduction of negative mood
through leisure to regulate emotions/moods of individuals under stress”; Iwasaki, p. 131)
are re ective of the ways in which leisure can be considered a resource in emotion-focused
coping.
Escape is, of course, a common leisure need and experience (Iso-Ahola, 1989), and
the use of activities for temporary escape is well-documented (e.g., Driver & Knopf, 1976,
1977; Ulrich et al., 1991). For example, Yaffe (1996) identiŽ ed a variety of “vehicles of
escape” used by victims of date rape, some of them healthier and more effective than others,
but most having an element of leisure. Whether through passive mental escapes (e.g., day
dreaming) or more active forms (i.e., actually getting away), temporary escape involves
“distancing oneself” from negative experiences (Ulrich et al., p. 77). The recent research
by Iwasaki and Mannell (2000b) has added still more support to the idea that leisure can be
used as a palliative escape in the coping process. They found that students who used leisure
for purposes of escape and distraction in the face of academic stress showed higher levels
of psychological well being. The vulnerability experienced in the wake of a negative life
event is thus mitigated by diversionary activities.
From a theoretical perspective it is difŽ cult to talk about diversionary activities because
of the relatively negative connotation associated with this term. Talking about “forms of
diversion” may seem to minimize the potential importance of ordinary activities of daily
life for the individual. Though, in fact, as Folkman and others (1997) found in their study
of people coping with chronic stress associated with AIDS, efforts to infuse ordinary events
with positive meaning provide “momentary respite from the ongoing stress” (Folkman &
Moskowitz, 2000, p. 116). They noted that, “for the most part, these events were ordinary
events of daily life that in less stressful moments might not even have been noted” (p. 116).
These, again, are the breathers that Lazarus and others (1980) identiŽ ed in their earlier
work.
Proposition 2: Leisure Activities Buffer the Impact of Negative Life Events by Generating
Optimism about the Future
Denial, distraction, and even avoidance, all associated with escapist activities, have also
been linked with hope (Breznitz, 1983). Patterns of activity that are apparently avoidant
may thus create the space necessary for hope and optimism. The previously-reviewed work
of Lazarus and Folkman on pleasant events as sustainers and restorers demonstrates the
impact of positive emotions in moving people from avoidance to hope. In creating some
Transcending Negative Life Events
227
room through distraction, control is restored to some extent and alternative possibilities are
envisioned.
Humor, a common leisure catalyst, works in a similar way. When generated in social
interaction it can create the kind of diversion that is relaxing in a way that permits the
restructuring of perceptions of stressful events (Williams, 2000). Inherent in the appreciation and generation of humor is the ability to see as least two viewpoints (McGhee, 1979).
Through humor people may gain a new perspective on an otherwise troubling situation.
Martin and Lefcourt (1983) found that humor moderates the relation between negative experience and mood management. A public gaffe can result in either embarrassment or, with
humor, the opportunity for endearing self-deprecation. Arguably, the underlying psychological function of such mechanisms is to create sufŽ cient emotional control for transcending
the negative effects of an experience to create a more positive outlook (McGhee, 1996;
Williams, 2000).
More generally, leisure has the power to restore hope for one’s future in spite of dire
circumstances. As noted in the work of Lazarus, Folkman, and their colleagues, as well
as the humor research referred to above, positively-toned emotions such as amusement
or excitement can sustain coping efforts and restore hope and optimism in the face of
adversity. Enjoyable experiences that require little risk are often encouraging; a brighter
future with new opportunities is more readily imagined. As Lazarus and others (1980) put
it, “Positively toned emotions reinforce successful new activities and, by virtue of their
intrinsic pleasurable nature, help put the person in a different, more optimistic ‘state of
mind’” (p. 212). In a study of individuals receiving therapeutic recreation services in a
rehabilitation hospital, Hutchinson (2000) found evidence of leisure’s potential to sustain
effort and generate hope in the face of disruptions associated with illness or disability.
Involvement in evening “diversionary” activities (such as going to the mall and listening to
music) came to symbolize possibilities for the future for some of the patients. For example,
a woman with multiple sclerosis noted that attending an evening of musical entertainment
was “. . . . so encouraging . . . it made me feel like I was part of the world again.”
For most people, leisure brings the expectation of enjoyment (e.g., Iso-Ahola, 1989;
Shaw, 1985). Turning one’s attention to sources of enjoyment in times of stress not only has
the effect of providing some relief and escape from the negative emotions in the palliative
sense of providing a breather, it also has the effect of opening up the realm of possibilities.
The notion that leisure may serve as a buffer by “disengaging” people from concerns associated with stressful life changes has been discussed in relation to normative life transitions
(Kleiber, 1985), but the same may be said of leisure’s potential contribution to coping in
the face of traumatic and unexpected change.
In a study of people with spinal cord injury, Yoshida (1993) illustrated this point with
an example of a young man who had recently been paralyzed, and, after an extremely
distressing rehabilitation period, was taken from the hospital by family members to their
cabin in the woods. With each passing mile his growing enthusiasm signaled to him that
life was still worth living and that there was much to still be appreciated, a feeling that he
couldn’t have imagined immediately after his injury.
The suggestion here is that positively-toned experiences create both an emotional uplift
and an opening up for cognitive reappraisal. Beyond simple distraction, such experiences
allow for the consideration of “possible selves” (cf., Markus & Nurius, 1986) in an imaginative, hopeful sense, prior to taking any action. Activities that are captivating but excessively
challenging may leave too little space for the re ective process and, in a therapeutic sense,
may be contraindicated at certain points in the adjustment process. This may explain in part
why Zuzanek, Robinson, and Iwasaki (1998) found physically active participation to contribute to higher rather than lower levels of stress following negative life events while more
228
D. A. Kleiber et al.
“leisurely” activities such as relaxation, resting, and socializing with friends showed more
beneŽ cial effects (p. 270). Nevertheless, with time and hope, interest in more challenging
activities and in using activities more instrumentally in narrative reconstruction is likely to
emerge.
Appropriation of Leisure for Self-Restoration and Personal Transformation
Emotion-focused coping, manifest in some forms of distraction or escape or the entertainment of positive experiences, often gives way over time to efforts to resolve the problems
precipitated by the event’s occurrence. While coping continues to be an ongoing response
to situational stressors associated with a negative life event, over time people begin to come
to terms with and even seek personal growth as a result of the event. These processes of
adjustment typically involve attempts at self-restoration and recreating continuity as well
as stimulating personal transformation (which is often re ective of positive change, or what
people perceive as personal growth). Initially anyway, most often people seek continuity
by trying to reconstruct life as it was before. The desire to return to the past, to make
things as they were before, is compelling in the face of disruptive unexpected and unwanted
change. Achieving a sense of coherence and a continuity of self involves reconciling changes
(whether bodily changes or role losses) and making sense of personal experiences in relation
to one’s past and hoped-for future.
The value of reestablishing a personal narrative as seamlessly as possible after a negative
life event can be contrasted, however, with using the event as a symbolic jumping off point
for transforming one’s previous existence in ways unimagined before the event. In the former
case continuity is the priority, and reconnecting is the metaphor of action; the latter re ects
the value and priority of discontinuity and what has been referred to as “restorying” (Brock
& Kleiber, 1994). In either case, leisure is relevant in the course of adjustment, especially
leisure activities that are personally expressive in the sense of generating meaning and
direction. Such activities are also likely to nurture perceptions of competence, control, and
freedom, qualities that are thought to moderate the impact of stress on well-being (Coleman
& Iso-Ahola, 1993).
Proposition 3: Leisure Activities Buffer the Impact of Negative Life Events by Aiding
in the Reconstruction of a Life Story That Is Continuous with the Past
The course of treatment for people who experience serious injuries or illnesses, is
usually designed primarily to help them locate pathways for reestablishing themselves,
reminding them at the outset that all is not lost and that they have options that may well
include the interests they had prior to the injury (Hutchinson, 2000). Even with paralysis in
both legs, wheelchair basketball is possible, for example, and adaptive technology has been
developed to the point that many activities can be renewed in some form. The resumption
of familiar activities is often both the hope of people who are injured or seriously ill and
an objective of the therapists who treat them (Hutchinson & Kleiber, 2000; Lee, Dattilo,
Kleiber, & Caldwell, 1996).
Leisure, in this situation, provides a way for people to get back to “normal.” Some
forms of leisure provide the social space to reconnect with others in familiar activities that
restore a sense of continuity. Resumed involvement in familiar leisure, such as playing pool
or going out for dinner, thus serves to afŽ rm one’s identity and reinforce valued aspects of
one’s previous life. For example, in Hutchinson’s (1996) study of adults with traumatic brain
injury, one woman deŽ ed her therapists’ orders by using risky leisure activities to assert her
perceptions of herself as a “determined” person. Another found working with others on a
jigsaw puzzle to be “sort of a community thing” which served to afŽ rm that she could still
assume a “helping” role in people’s lives, a role that had been a major part of her life before
Transcending Negative Life Events
229
her stroke (Hutchinson, 2000). Whether it is a return to a style of interacting, as in these two
cases, or to an activity itself, establishing continuity with the self of the past is the priority.
Reconnecting is rarely an easy process, however. As studies of older people have
established, dealing with loss most effectively usually means abandoning some activities
even as others are “selected” and “optimized” (Baltes & Baltes, 1990). Holding on to some
activities assures some degree of continuity even in the face of dramatic changes. Of course,
this assumes that there are some activities, or at least familiar companions, to recover. In
fact, as others have suggested, if the loss is a loss of a signiŽ cant other, the creation or
re-creation of friendship and companionship opportunities is clearly compensatory (cf.,
Coleman & Iso-Ahola, 1993; Iso-Ahola & Park, 1996) as in studies of widowhood where
widows establish close relationships with others in familiar activities that they enjoyed with
their husbands (e.g., Lopata, 1993). If the loss is a loss of ability, as with a disabling accident,
the cultivation of other activity skills would be ameliorative. If one has a wide repertoire
of leisure interests, reviewing the options still available is an adaptive, problem-focused
response. In a study of the relationship between “self-complexity” and vulnerability to stress,
Linville (1987) found that people who had maintained more complex representations of
self were less depressed in stressful circumstances than those who maintained less complex
self-representations. And while leisure interests were not assessed per se in that study,
it follows that a wider repertoire of expressive interests would contribute to such selfcomplexity. Accordingly, in a study of older adults, Dupuis and Smale (1995) found a
signiŽ cant relationship between psychological well-being and leisure diversity in older
people, concluding that “a greater repertoire of leisure pursuits from which to draw may
be related to higher levels of psychological well-being and less frequent occurrences of
depression among older adults” (p. 83).
Proposition 4: Leisure Activities Are Used in the Wake of Negative Life Events as Vehicles
for Personal Transformation
Understanding that “all is not lost” requires considering what one no longer can be and
what aspects of oneself continue to exist in spite of the event. Nevertheless, the work on post
traumatic growth suggests a kind of reconstruction of self that can occur as a consequence of
having one’s life disrupted in a signiŽ cant way. Constructing a future that is both enjoyable
and meaningful becomes a mission in some cases. If people are intentional beings, capable
of authoring a life story, in uenced though it may be by circumstances, then a disruption
allows for a “rewrite” of the story rather than simply requiring a mending of it (e.g., Brock
& Kleiber, 1994).
Restructuring of life goals and commitments, new activity interests, and greater attention to the present have been regularly observed in the wake of negative life events (Tedeschi
et al., 1998). The word transformation applies to such changes, and leisure often plays a
central role in this process. It has become almost axiomatic for midlife men suffering heart
attacks to review their life styles, reassess life for what it offers, and reconsider what is
most important. A reduced workload and more exercise often follows, but being with one’s
family is typically still more important. Patterns such as this have been associated with a
wide variety of illnesses, including cancer (Stewart & Healy, 1985). The metaphor of a
“phoenix rising from the ashes” is often used in such cases; but even with less traumatic
cases, the disintegration caused by such events creates the conditions for reorganization
and makes individuals more open to change in priorities. In these situations, as indicated
earlier, people often come to a greater appreciation of their more intimate relationships and
of the “smaller things” in life (Tedeschi et al., 1998).
This possibility of personal transformation tends to be neglected in rehabilitation practice and research (Hutchinson & Kleiber, 2000). The lack of attention is due in part to
230
D. A. Kleiber et al.
an emphasis on restoration of that which has been lost, rather than on coming to terms
with the reality of the loss and the question of how life can be proŽ tably reorganized and
redirected as a result of the disruption. The restoration of continuity is usually a priority for
the individual affected and for those friends, family, and professionals in a position to help;
attention is rarely given to how an activity Ž ts with an altered conception of self.
In some cases, though, a dramatic reorientation to leisure has been observed. In
Hutchinson’s (1996) study of people with traumatic brain injury the inability to return
to work seemed to be catalyst for a new awareness of leisure. Study participants embraced
opportunities to volunteer, work out in the gym, and learn photography, in spite of the fact
that these patterns were entirely new to them. In Flow: The Psychology of Optimal Experience, Csikszentmihalyi (1990) referred to several examples of such personal transformation
as “cheating chaos.” He pointed to work in Milan, Italy, with individuals who had lost the
use of limbs in accidents and who identiŽ ed their accidents as being both the most negative
and the most positive events in their lives. Csikszentmihalyi related this reaction to the
“focusing” effect of a tragic event. The limitations of the handicap become the new focus
of attention for applying effort and skill. Goals are clariŽ ed and contradictory alternatives
are reduced in the face of the demands of just coping. The functional effectiveness associated with this problem-focused coping can be “ ow-producing ” and rewarding in its own
right. Learning to live again in a new way, focusing on what the environment affords, and
developing the skills necessary for positive adaptation becomes a source of enjoyment and
pride in many cases.
Implications for Further Research
The dramatic life event is generally so disruptive that the normal tendencies toward selfconsistency (Lecky, 1968) are reduced or even intentionally abandoned. While reestablishing some semblance of a former lifestyle creates a degree of continuity that is stabilizing,
the changes created by the event may be liberating for the discovery of new alternatives.
To this end it is likely to be easier to make changes in patterns of leisure than in other aspects of one’s life. And the consideration of alternatives may be as important as the actions
that would be taken. Iwasaki and Smale (1998) found that changes in leisure goals had a
stronger effect on psychological well-being than did changes in level of participation. “The
stronger effects observed in the importance of leisure goals compared with leisure participation appear to suggest that how individuals think about their leisure participation is more
important in in uencing well-being than is participation per se” (p. 45). The meaning of
leisure—whether shaped around old goals or new ones—seems to be important for personal
growth and transformation.
Further research is needed to test the generality of the propositions presented here. As
it relates to elaborating leisure’s role as a coping resource, further research is needed to
determine in what ways, and under what conditions, people use leisure as a palliative or
breather (Lazarus et al., 1980) from the stressors associated with negative life events. As
Iwaski (2001) suggested, “it will be important to study how leisure may help individuals
cope with various stressful events in different life circumstances” (p. 138). In addition,
we suggest that a better understanding of the reciprocal nature of coping and adjustment
in relation to negative life events is required. For example, we need to better understand
whether some level of successful coping is required before adjustment (self-restoration and
personal transformation) can occur or whether certain forms of leisure are more helpful in
situations of coping and others in fostering longer term adjustment.
In addition, further exploration of leisure’s ability to generate positive emotions that
assist in sustaining coping efforts and in the reappraisal process is warranted. Folkman
and Moskowitz (2001) raise a number of issues and questions about the role of positive
Transcending Negative Life Events
231
emotions in the coping process that are salient to this discussion here. They suggest, “At
this point, there is little in the literature about the intensity and duration of positive emotions necessary to activate their adaptive functions during stress. : : : It may be that it is the
frequency of positive emotions, and not their intensity or duration, that confers beneŽ ts on
the individual” (p. 117). These are some of the questions requiring the attention of further
research.
Conclusion
Most of our illustrations for this analysis were from examples of individuals who had
incapacitating physical accidents. The existing literature suggests comparable patterns with
people who suffer the loss of a spouse or child, the loss of a job, and other signiŽ cant
negative life events. Coping with chronic stress is also no doubt different in some respects
from coping with events that are Ž nite and circumscribed. Still we feel conŽ dent that leisure
is an important resource for coping with stress, whatever its source.
The experience of negative life events is commonly associated with the disruption of
patterns of personal expressiveness and sociability. Beyond that, the course of resuming or
reconstructing a coherent narrative may involve periods of escapist activity—especially in
the absence of social support—that are emotionally necessary if not personally meaningful.
Pleasant events have the effect of turning a mere distracting experience into an occasion for
hope and optimism, and shape personal meaning around old loves and new possibilities.
And whether meaningful activity involves reconnecting with the self that was temporarily
“lost,” reorganizing the self around old interests, setting new directions for a new self, or
perhaps some combination of those, it may be the single most important process in enabling
one to carry on with hope and appreciation for life itself.
The context of leisure is an opportunity for a wide range of experiences, from trivial,
self-indulgent escape to self-expanding personal expressiveness. The ways of incorporating
activity into treatment for rehabilitation purposes are nearly as varied. But neglected in
research on rehabilitation—and indeed sometimes by providers as well—is the manner
and frequency with which leisure activities are implicated in the illness itself as well as its
treatment. Nor has sufŽ cient consideration been given to their place in long-term adjustment
and personal change. The research reviewed here demonstrates the importance of leisure
while revealing a more complex set of effects than is generally recognized. By understanding
some of the dimensionality of the various functions of leisure, clearer directions for both
research and practice are revealed.
Notes
1. This manuscript was written before the September 11th terrorist attacks on New York and
Washington. At the time of our writing we had considered negative life events as those that may strike
individuals and their families. We had not considered events, such as the September 11th attacks,
that would devastate entire communities, threaten national security, and undermine a basic sense of
freedom for all who witness them. Since then we have read numerous appeals to resume life as it has
been, if only to defy the terrorists, including leisure activities such as attending sporting events and
visiting state and national parks. As one writer put it, “It takes strength to laugh when you are afraid.
It is the ultimate act of deŽ ance” (Perrier, 2001). National Public Radio reported that moviegoing in
the weeks following the tragedy was signiŽ cantly higher than that for the same period of the year
before. Clearly, though, there is more to be learned and understood about coping from all of this, but
it is worth noting that individual and community responses to the attacks have born witness to the
enduring human and collective spirit that sustains people in the face of traumatic loss. The present
analysis offers only a glimpse of that spirit.
232
D. A. Kleiber et al.
2. We regard it as somewhat unfortunate that Iwasaki and Mannell chose to interpret their
Ž ndings as offering little evidence for the “buffering” effects of leisure when, more accurately, they
were repudiating the model of leisure as a “moderator” of the effects of stress on health and well
being. A “buffering effect” would still be an appropriate way to characterize a “mediating” effect.
3. While coping and adjustment are sometimes used interchangeably, we choose here to adopt
the interpretation of Livneh and Antonak (1997) which recognizes coping as the initial emotional
challenge and adjustment as the longer term problem that requires integration with other aspects of
ones’ life.
References
Aldwin, C. M. (1994). Stress, coping, and development: An integrative perspective. New York: The
Guilford Press.
Ashton-Shaeffer, C. (1995). The role of leisure in the bereavement process of later-life widows.
Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
Baltes, P., & Baltes, M. (1990). Psychological perspectives on successful aging: The model of selective
optimization with compensation. In P. Baltes & M. Baltes (Eds.), Successful aging: Perspectives
from the behavioral sciences. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Bolger, N., & Eckenrode, J. (1991). Social relationships, personality, and anxiety during a major
stressful event. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 61, 440 – 449.
Breznitz, S. (1983). Denial versus hope: Concluding remarks. In S. Breznitz (Ed.), The denial of stress
(pp. 1 – 30). New York: International Universities Press.
Brock, S. C., & Kleiber, D. A. (1994). Narratives in medicine: The stories of elite college athletes’
career ending injuries. Qualitative Health Research, 4, 411 – 430.
Caltabiano, M. L. (1988). The effects of predisposing variables and leisure on the relationship between
stressful life events and illness symptomatology. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, James Cook
University, Townsville, Australia.
Caltabiano, M. L. (1994). Measuring the similarity among leisure activities based on a perceived
stress-reduction beneŽ t. Leisure Studies, 13, 17 – 31.
Caltabiano, M. L. (1995). Main and stress-moderating health beneŽ ts of leisure. Society and Leisure,
18(1), 33 – 52.
Coleman, D. (1993). Leisure based social support, leisure dispositions and health. Journal of Leisure
Research, 25(4), 350 – 361.
Coleman, D., & Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1993). Leisure and health: The role of social support and selfdetermination. Journal of Leisure Research, 25(2), 111 – 128.
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1990). Flow: The psychology of optimal experience. New York: Harper
Perennial.
Driver, B. L., & Knopf, R. C. (1976). Temporary escape: One product of sport Ž sheries management.
Fisheries, 1(2), 24 – 29.
Driver, B. L., & Knopf, R. C. (1977). Personality, outdoor recreation and expected consequences.
Environment and Behavior, 9, 169 – 193.
Dupuis, S. L., & Smale, B. J. (1995). An examination of relationship between psychological wellbeing and depression and leisure activity participation among older adults. Society and Leisure,
18(1), 67 – 92.
Folkman, S. (1997). Positive psychological states and coping with severe stress. Social Science and
Medicine, 45, 1207 – 1221.
Folkman, S., & Moskowitz, J. T. (2000). Stress, positive emotion and coping. Current Directions in
Psychological Science, 9, 115 – 118.
Folkman, S., Moskowitz, J. T., Ozer, E. M., & Park, C. L. (1997). Positive meaningful events and
coping in the context of HIV/AIDS. In B. H. Gottlieb (Ed.), Coping with chronic stress. New
York: Plenum Press.
Haworth, J. T., & Ducker, J. (1991). Psychological well-being and access to categories of experience
in unemployed young adults. Leisure Studies, 10, 265 – 274.
Transcending Negative Life Events
233
Henderson, K. A., Bedini, L. A., Hecht, L., & Shuler, R. (1995). Women with physical disabilities
and the negotiation of leisure constraints. Leisure Studies, 14, 17– 31.
Henderson, K. A., Bialeschki, M. D., Shaw, S. M., & Freysinger, V. J. (1989). A leisure of one’s own:
A feminist perspective on women’s leisure. State College, PA: Venture Publishing.
Houston, B. K. (1987). Stress and coping. In C. R. Snyder & C. E. Ford (Eds.), Coping with negative
life events (pp. 373 – 397). New York: Plenum Press.
Hutchinson, S. L. (1996). An exploration of the processes of self-identity reconstruction by people
who acquired a brain injury. Unpublished masters thesis, Dalhousie University, Halifax, Nova
Scotia, Canada.
Hutchinson, S. L., & Kleiber, D. A. (2000). Heroic masculinity following spinal cord injury:
Implications for therapeutic recreation practice and research. Therapeutic Recreation Journal,
34, 42– 54.
Hutchinson, S. S. (2000). Discourse and the construction of meaning in the context of therapeutic
recreation. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Georgia, Athens, GA.
Iso-Ahola, S. E. (1989). Motivation for leisure. In E. L. Jackson & T. L. Burton (Eds.), Understanding
leisure and recreation. State College, PA.
Iso-Ahola, S. E., Jackson, E., & Dunn, E. (1994). Starting, ceasing, and replacing leisure activities
over the lifespan. Journal of Leisure Research, 26, 227 – 249.
Iso-Ahola, S. E., & Park, C. J. (1996). Leisure-related social support and self-determination as buffers
of stress-illness relationship. Journal of Leisure Research, 28(3), 169 – 187.
Iwasaki, Y. (2001). Contributions of leisure to coping with daily hassles in university students’ lives.
Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 33(2), 128 – 141.
Iwasaki, Y., & Mannell, R. C. (2000a). Hierarchical dimensions of leisure-stress coping. Leisure
Sciences, 22, 163 – 181.
Iwasaki, Y., & Mannell, R. C. (2000b). The effects of leisure beliefs and coping strategies on stresshealth relationships: A Ž eld study. Leisure/Loisir, 24(1 – 2), 3 – 57.
Iwasaki, Y., & Smale, B. J. A. (1998). Longitudinal analyses of the relationships among life transitions,
chronic health problems, leisure, and psychological well-being. Leisure Sciences, 20, 25– 52.
Janoff-Bulman, R., & Berger, A. R. (2000). The other side of trauma: Toward a psychology of appreciation. In J. H. Harvey & E. D. Miller (Eds.), Loss and trauma: General and close relationship
perspectives. Philadelphia: Brunner-Routledge.
Janoff-Bulman, R., & Timko, C. (1985). Working with victims: Changes in the researcher’s assumptive
world. In A. Baum & J. Singer (Eds.), Advances in environmental psychology, vol. 5 (pp. 75 – 97).
Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.
Kelly, J. R. (1987). Freedom to be: A new sociology of leisure. New York: Macmillan.
Kelly, J. R., Steinkamp, M., & Kelly, J. (1987). Later-life satisfaction: Does leisure contribute? Leisure
Sciences, 9, 189 – 200.
Kleiber, D. A. (1985). Motivational reorientation in adulthood and the resource of leisure. In
D. Kleiber & M. Maehr (Eds.), Motivation and adulthood, vol 4. (pp. 217 – 250.) Greenwich, CT:
JAI Press.
Kleiber, D. A. (1999). Leisure experience and human development: A dialectical interpretation.
New York: Basic Books.
Kleiber, D. A., Brock, S. C., Dattilo, J., Lee, Y., & Caldwell, L. (1995). The relevance of leisure
in an illness experience: Realities of spinal cord injury. Journal of Leisure Research, 27, 283 –
299.
Kleiber, D. A., Dattilo, J., Loy, D., & Hutchinson, S. L. (2001). The impact of leisure engagement in
adjustment to spinal cord injury. Unpublished manuscript. The University of Georgia, Athens,
GA.
Lazarus, R. S. (1999). Stress and emotion: A new synthesis. New York: Springer.
Lazarus, R. S., & Folkman, S. (1984). Stress, appraisal, and coping. New York: Springer.
Lazarus, R. S., Kanner, A. D., & Folkman, S. (1980). Emotions: A cognitive-phenomenological
analysis. In R. Plutchik & H. Kellerman (Eds.), Theories of emotion (pp. 189 – 217). New York:
Academic Press.
Lecky, P. (1968). Self-consistency. Garden City, NY: Doubleday.
234
D. A. Kleiber et al.
Lee, Y., Dattilo, J., Kleiber, D. A., & Caldwell, L. (1996). Exploring the meaning of continuity of
recreation activity in the early stages of adjustment for people with spinal cord injuries. Leisure
Sciences, 18, 209 – 225.
Linville, P. W. (1987). Self-complexity as a cognitive buffer against stress-related illness and depression. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 663 – 676.
Livneh, H., & Antonak, R. F. (1997). Psychosocial adaptation to chronic illness and disability.
Gaithersburg, MD: Aspen Publishers.
Lobo, F. (1996). Coping with bulk unobligated time: The case of unemployment. Society and Leisure,
19(2), 377 – 413.
Lopata, H. Z. (1993). Widows: Social integration and activity. In. J. R. Kelly (Ed.), Activity and aging.
Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Mannell, R. (1993). High-investment activity and life satisfaction among older adults: Committed,
serious leisure and  ow. In J. R. Kelly (Ed.), Activity and aging. Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
Markus, H. R., & Nurius, P. (1986). Possible selves. American Psychologist, 41, 954 – 969.
Martin, R. A., & Lefcourt, H. M. (1983). Sense of humor as a moderator of the relation between
stressors and moods. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 45, 1313 – 1324.
McGhee, P. S. (1979). Humor: Its origin and development. San Francisco: W.H. Freeman.
McGhee, P. S. (1996). Health, healing and the amuse system: Humor as survival training. New York:
Kendall/Hunt.
Patterson, I. (1996). Participation in leisure activities by older adults after a stressful life event: The
loss of a spouse. International Journal of Aging and Human Development, 42, 123 – 142.
Perrier, P. (2001). In time, Americans’ tears will dry; laughter will return to our nation. Atlanta Journal
Constitution, October 2, p. A13.
Rook, K. S. (1987). Social support vs. companionship: Effects of life stress, loneliness, and evaluations
by others. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 52, 1132 – 1147.
Shamir, B. (1986). Self-esteem and the psychological impact of unemployment. Social Psychology
Quarterly, 49, 61 – 72.
Shaw, S. (1985). The meaning of leisure in everyday life. Leisure Sciences, 13, 33 – 50.
Snyder, C. R., & Ford, C. E. (Eds.) (1987). Coping with negative life events. New York: Plenum Press.
Snyder, C. R., Ford, C. E., & Harris, R. N. (1987). The effects of theoretical perspective on the analysis
of coping with negative life events. In C. R. Snyder & C. E. Ford (Eds.), Coping with negative
life events. New York: Plenum Press.
Stebbins, R. (1992). Amateurs, professionals, and serious leisure. Montreal: McGill-Queen’s
University of Press.
Stewart, A. J., & Healy, J. M. (1985). Personality and adaptation to change. In R. Hogan & W. Jones
(Eds.), Perspectives in personality. New York: JAI Press.
Tedeschi, R. G., Park, C. L., & Calhoun, L. G. (Eds.). (1998). Posttraumatic growth: Positive changes
in the aftermath of crisis. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Ulrich, R. S., Dimberg, U., & Driver, B. L. (1991). Psychophysiological indicators of leisure beneŽ ts.
In B. L. Driver, P. J. Brown, & G. L. Peterson (Eds.), BeneŽ ts of leisure. State College, PA:
Venture.
Van Tigham, P. (2001). The bear’s embrace: A true story of surviving a grizzly bear attack. Cited by
E. Jackson. Personal communication. January.
Weinblatt, N., & Navon, L. (1993). Flight from leisure: A neglected phenomenon in leisure studies.
Leisure Sciences, 17, 309 – 325.
Wheeler, R. J., & Frank, M. A. (1988). IdentiŽ cation of stress buffers. Behavioral Medicine, 14,
78 – 89.
Williams, G. (1984). The genesis of chronic illness: Narrative re-construction. Sociology of Health
and Illness, 6, 175 – 200.
Williams, R. S. T. (2000). Use of humor in coping with stress. Unpublished doctoral dissertation,
University of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
WineŽ eld, A. H., Tiggeman, M., & WineŽ eld, H. R. (1992). Spare time use and psychological wellbeing in employed and unemployed young people. Journal of Occupational and Organizational
Psychology, 65, 307 – 313.
Transcending Negative Life Events
235
Yaffe, R. (1996). Leisure and adjustment to date rape. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University
of Georgia, Athens, Georgia.
Yoshida, K. K. (1993). Reshaping of self: A pendular reconstruction of self and identity among adults
with traumatic spinal cord injuries, Sociology of Health and Illness, 15, 217 – 245.
Zuzanek, J., Robinson, J. P., & Iwasaki, Y. (1998). The relationships between stress, health, and
physically active leisure as a function of life-cycle. Leisure Sciences, 20, 253 – 275.