The DOI matches its Crossref record.
A Comparison of User vs Researcher Determined Level of Past Experience on Recreation Preference
Abstract
Amount of past use-experience in recreational pursuits can be determined many ways, and have varying amounts of influence on recreation choice and preferences. This paper reports two measures of past experience that were compared: (1) an index value composed of four measures of frequency and years of participation, and (2) a user-declared classification of four experience-skill levels (i.e. beginner to expert). Horseback rider preference for equestrian-related facilities, programs, and services was the dependent variable for comparing to two experience measures. As a secondary aspect of the analysis, the subjective user-declared classifications were also empirically examined or defined according to the frequency and years of participation variables to see if the user-declared classifications were distinctly different. Results indicate that horseback riders vary greatly in past use experience, and that the user-declared classifications were distinctly different. Results indicate that horseback riders vary greatly in past use experience, and that the user-declared classifications are clearly distinct when defined on the basis of participation variables. However, the subjective, user-declared experience classifications are not as significantly related to recreation preference as the objectively formed experience index. It is concluded that index measures of past use-experience are more valid measures of participatory influence on recreation preference than experience-skill categ…
Overview
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
Claims other papers make about this one
Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?
Universally, equestrian does not define or outline a consistent approach to riding or horse-handling capabilities, levels or skills due to the complexity of the horse-rider relationship.
“Universally, equestrian does not define or outline a consistent approach [47,48] to riding or horse-handling capabilities, levels or skills due to the complexity of the horse-rider relationship [49,50].”
From What People Really Think About Safety around Horses: The Relationship between Risk Perception, Values and Safety Behaviours (2020) · cites this paper as [47]
Citations
Cites
No references could be resolved yet.
Research works printed but not linked: 16
- Anderson D. L., 1981, Proc. of the Applied Geog. Conf, 4, 272
- Brown P. J., 1980, J. Leisure Res., 12, 229, 10.1080/00222216.1980.11969447 · DOI
- Bryan H., 1977, Leisure Res., 9, 174, 10.1080/00222216.1977.11970328 · DOI
- Driver B. L., 1975, Naturalist, 26, 19
- Hammitt W. E., 1983, For. Sci., 29, 262
- Kaplan S., 1973, Environmental Design Research, 275
- Munley V. G., 1976, Land Economics, 52, 545, 10.2307/3145196 · DOI
- Neilsen J. M., 1977, Pacific Sociological Review, 20, 568, 10.2307/1388716 · DOI
- Roggenbuck J. W., 1980, Specialization, displacement, and definition of depreciative behavior among Virginia canoeists.
- Schreyer R., 1982, Forest and River Recreation: Research Update, 154
- 10.1080/01490408409513027 · DOI
- Schreyer R., 1978, Westwater and Desolation Canyons-Whitewater River Recreation Study.
- Schreyer R., 1979, In Proc. 1st Annual Nat. Conf. on Recreation Planning and Development, 1, 191
- Schreyer R., 1976, The Dinosaur National Monument Whitewater River Recreation Study.
- Schreyer R., 1984, J. Leisure Res., 16, 34, 10.1080/00222216.1984.11969571 · DOI
- 10.1080/01490408009512944 · DOI
Cited by
Sorted by citations
Chapman, M., Thomas, M., & Thompson, K. (2020) · Animals · doi:10.3390/ani10122222 · Cited by 20
Metadata
- Authors
- Hammitt, W. E., Knauf, L. R., & Noe, F. P.
- Venue
- Journal of Leisure Research
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 1989-07
- Volume
- 21
- Issue
- 3
- Pages
- 202-213
- ISSN
- 0022-2216
- 2159-6417
- Cited by
- 32
- References
- 0
- Language
- en
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
