The Effects of Ethnicity and Leisure Satisfaction on Happiness, Peacefulness, and Quality of Life

Abstract

The purpose of this study was to examine how ethnicity and leisure satisfaction affected people's happiness, peacefulness, and quality of life. A trilingual telephone survey of Chinese/Canadians (N = 261) and British/Canadians (N = 258) was conducted. Hierarchical multiple regressions indicated that sex had no significant effect on any regressors. Ethnicity significantly affected standard of living, achieving in life, and life as a whole. Overall leisure satisfaction significantly affected happiness, peacefulness, and all nine quality of life domains. Canonical correlations also showed that happiness and achieving in life were positively correlated for British/Canadians and happiness and personal relationships were positively correlated for some Chinese/Canadians. Peacefulness was positively correlated with spirituality/religion and community connectedness, but negatively correlated with personal relationships, for some Chinese/Canadians. Implications and research recommendations are provided.

Keywords:

• Chinese
• ethnicity
• happiness
• leisure
• quality of life
• satisfaction

North America's sociodemographic composition is undergoing a sea change. In the United States, 4% of the population was Asian or Pacific Islander in 2000 and this percentage was expected to double by 2025 (Cheeseman Day, 2007). According to 2002 census figures, Chinese was the largest Asian group (Barnes & Bennett, 2002), and greater China (i.e., Hong Kong, Taiwan, People's Republic of China) was the second-largest region of birth of the U.S. foreign-born population (Malone, Baluja, Costanzo, & Davis, 2003). Although British/Canadians remain the majority in Canada, the visible minority population exceeded 13% in 2000 (Statistics Canada, 2003). This figure is much greater than the 5% reported in 1981 and much lower than that projected for 2017, when around 20% of Canada's population will be visible minority group members (Statistics Canada, 2005). Chinese was the largest and fastest growing visible minority group (Statistics Canada, 2003, 2005).

Although research on Chinese North Americans' leisure has become more commonplace (e.g., Walker & Wang, 2008, in press) and research on the effect of leisure satisfaction (Beard & Ragheb, 1980) on Chinese people's well-being exists (Lu & Hu, 2005; Vong, 2005), a review of the literature did not uncover any studies that investigated the intersection of the two. Thus, the purpose of this study was to examine how ethnicity (i.e., Chinese/Canadians and British/Canadians) and leisure satisfaction affected people's happiness, peacefulness, and quality of life.

Literature Review

Quality of Life and Happiness

What constitutes the “good” life? To answer this question, researchers have assessed peoples' quality of life (QOL) in Western cultures (e.g., Bramston, Pretty, & Chipuer, 2002) and in Eastern cultures including China (Shek, Chan, & Lee, 2005). Unfortunately, these efforts have often been confounded by a lack of consensus concerning the definition of QOL and, consequently, the use of other terminology such as subjective quality of life (SQOL), life satisfaction, happiness, and well-being (Bramston et al., 2002). Contemporary definitions of QOL suggest that it is socially and culturally constructed and that QOL subsumes factors such as life satisfaction and happiness (Iwasaki, 2006). The World Health Organization (WHO, 1997) defined QOL as:

individuals' perception of their position in life in the context of culture and value system and in relation to their goals, expectations, standards and concerns. It is a broad ranging concept affected in a complex way by the person's physical health, psychological state, level of independence, social relationships, and their relationships to salient features of their environment. (p. 1)

Happiness, a subjective or person-centered indicator, should be viewed as the highest assessment of a person's “total condition” or “as a global assessment of a person's quality of life” (Shin & Johnson, 1978, p. 478). According to Lyubomirsky, Sheldon, and Schkade (2005) interest in happiness has become a global phenomenon and is not simply a Western or North American fixation. Lyubomirsky et al. argued “that the ability to be happy and contented with life is a central criterion of adaptation and positive mental health” (p. 111). Furthermore, happy people are believed to have a higher QOL resulting from having more successful marriages, more friends, and stronger social networks/support/interactions as well as more flow experiences. Finally, happy people generally live longer than less happy people (Lyubomirsky et al.).

Subjective well-being (SWB) has been extensively researched (e.g., Diener, 2000; Diener, Oishi, & Lucas, 2003) and may represent a possible means of measuring QOL. “SWB is one measure of the quality of life of an individual and of societies” (Diener et al., 2003, p. 405) and involves people's affective and cognitive evaluations of their lives. SWB has been measured emotionally regarding people's feelings of joy and contentment as well as cognitively with the use of life satisfaction surveys that have attempted to assess satisfaction of various domains such as marriage, work, and leisure (Diener et al., 2003). Based on the above, our study examined both the cognitive (e.g., QOL) and affective (e.g., happiness) aspects of the “good” life, as well as the relationship between the two.

Chinese Perspectives on QOL, Happiness, and Peacefulness

“People differ markedly across societies in the factors they consider to be relevant to life satisfaction, perhaps because culture can have a pervasive influence on people's values and goals” (Diener, 2000, p. 39). Consequently, a growing interest exists in understanding happiness and QOL in other cultures including the Chinese. Recent research has investigated Chinese conceptualizations of happiness (e.g., Lu, 2001; Uchida, Norasakkunkit, & Kitayama, 2004), QOL and SWB (Diener, Suh, Smith, & Shao, 1995; Kau & Wang, 1995; Liu, 2006) as well as elderly Chinese people's QOL (Chan, Cheng, Phillips, Chi, & Ho, 2004; Lee, 2005; Leung, Wu, Lue, & Tang, 2004).

Although a new word in the Chinese language (Lu, 2001), happiness has a rich and storied history in Chinese culture. Happiness can be understood from three different philosophical perspectives: Confucianism, Taoism, and Buddhism (Lu). In Confucian philosophy the family is the center of everyday existence. Thus, happiness is the striving:

to preserve and expand the prosperity and vitality of one's family. Happiness is to achieve this ultimate life goal through hard work and frugality to accumulate material resources, through intellectual labor and passing exams to obtain respectable social status, through suppression of selfish and earthly desires to lead a virtuous life, and ultimately through fulfillments of one's social duties. (Lu, 2001, p. 410)

Although their study was not directly based on Confucianism, Leung et al. (2004) found with Chinese that “the elderly emphasized the relationship with family members and took the needs of the family as their personal needs”(p. 187) suggesting that QOL may be attached to the overall needs of the family. Taoism differs from Confucian thought. Lu noted: “Happiness in Taoism is the personal liberation from all human desires, through following the Natural force, not doing anything, accepting fate calmly, and facing life with a peaceful mind” (p. 411). Finally, with Buddhism, “Physical exercises, meditation, doing charitable deeds, eliminating all human desires are all ways to lift up the soul to reach nirvana and eternal happiness” (Lu, 2001, p. 412). Lyubomirsky et al. (2005) noted that happy individuals tend not to be self-centered or selfish, but are more pro-social and charitable, which reflects both Confucianism and Buddhism.

For elderly Chinese people, three factors—person-environment interaction, strong family ties, and traditional Chinese values and beliefs—exert a strong influence on perceptions of QOL (Leung et al., 2004). In another study involving elderly Chinese, Chan et al. (2004) found that life quality meant the same thing as life satisfaction, happiness, or a good life. Lau, Cummins, and McPherson (2005) found a similar lack of differentiation between happiness and satisfaction within Chinese culture.

Finally, Diener et al. (1995) noted that historically Pacific Rim countries (i.e., Japan, China, South Korea) have typically reported lower levels of happiness when compared with the United States. In Japan, for example, it may be undesirable to admit that one is happy at the risk of being atypical (Diener et al.). Diener et al. added that other cultures may also find it prideful and arrogant to report being very happy. In addition, research by Tsai and her colleagues (Tsai, Knutson, & Fung, 2006; Tsai, Miao, & Seppala, 2007) has shown that whereas Euro-North Americans ideally want to experience high arousal positive emotions (e.g., excitement) Asian people ideally want to experience low arousal positive emotions (e.g., calm, peacefulness). Thus, in a study involving Chinese people, examining not only happiness but peacefulness seemed necessary.

Ethnicity, Leisure, Quality of Life, and Happiness

Many of the current conceptualizations of how leisure influences QOL and happiness have been limited because of the dominant Western perspectives found in the leisure and QOL research literature (Iwasaki, 2006). However, a multi-national study conducted by the WHO that included Westernized countries (e.g., United States, France) and East-Asian countries (e.g., Japan, Thailand) found that opportunities for and participation in leisure activities was a significant contributor to QOL (Iwasaki). Moreover, similar results have been found for happiness. Hills and Argyle (1998) and Diener (2000) found that lasting happiness was influenced by involvement in leisure activities that produced flow experiences (Csikszentmihalyi, 1975). Peak experiences (Privette, 1983) parallel flow experiences because they represent models of optimal human experiencing. Consequently, peak experiences defined as moments of both intense and pure positive happiness (Maslow, 1967) further support a leisure-happiness relationship. Similarly, but from a QOL perspective, “A defining characteristic of the peak experience is the renewal of self and a deeper sense of meaning and purpose in life” (Dodson, 1996, p. 317).

Because leisure participation, and therefore leisure experiences, is an antecedent of leisure satisfaction (Crandall, 1980; Ragheb & Tate, 1993), leisure satisfaction is most likely the best predictor of happiness and QOL. Beard and Ragheb (1980) stated:

Leisure plays a dynamic role in individuals' lives, and it would be useful to know how the satisfaction gained from leisure choices relates to personal and social adjustment, mental health, and overall happiness. Knowledge of such relationships could improve individuals' quality of life. (p. 21)

Beard and Ragheb defined leisure satisfaction as “the positive perceptions or feelings which an individual forms, elicits, or gains as a result of engaging in leisure activities and choices” (p. 22). They further identified six types of leisure satisfaction: psychological, educational, social, relaxation, physiological, and aesthetic. Western research reviews (cf. Mannell & Kleiber, 1997; Hills & Argyle, 1998) have shown that leisure satisfaction had a positive relationship with QOL, and that leisure satisfaction was a better predictor of QOL than job satisfaction. Lloyd and Auld's (2002) research supported this finding since they discovered that the degree to which their respondents felt satisfied with their leisure positively affected their QOL. Using Beard and Ragheb's Leisure Satisfaction Measure, these researchers also found that overall leisure satisfaction, and aesthetic and psychological satisfaction in particular, had a significant positive effect on QOL beyond leisure participation.

Research on QOL and leisure satisfaction has also been conducted with Chinese people. Lau, Cummins, and McPherson (2005) found, for example, that the Personal Wellbeing Index (International Wellbeing Group, 2006) demonstrated cross-cultural equivalence between Hong Kong and Australian adults. People from Hong Kong were significantly less satisfied with their standard of living, achieving in life, personal health, personal relationships, personal safety, future security, and life as a whole. Chinese participants were also found to be less happy than their Australian counterparts. Lu and Hu (2005) also examined Chinese people's happiness by studying Taiwanese university students. A hierarchical linear regression found that (in order of entry); a) sex was not significant, b) extraversion and neuroticism were significant, c) leisure activity participation was not significant, d) academic but not financial satisfaction was significant, and e) leisure satisfaction was significant. Finally, in a study of Chinese residents of Macao, Vong (2005) found a positive correlation between leisure satisfaction and QOL among Macao residents. Specifically, leisure satisfaction was more strongly correlated with subjective domains of life such as place in community and emotional well-being and less correlated with objectively measurable domains of health and material well-being.

Vong (2005) also uncovered that men in Chinese society expressed greater levels of leisure satisfaction than women. He suggested that this difference might be associated with historical ideological values affecting the role of Chinese women. In contrast, some Western research has found that women reported being happier than men (Argyle, 1996), although this proposition has limited support (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). Regardless, testing for sex-based differences in any examination of ethnicity, leisure satisfaction, happiness, peacefulness, and quality of life seemed important. Therefore, based on the literature reviewed, we expected that leisure satisfaction would significantly predict happiness, peacefulness, and quality of life above and beyond both sex and ethnicity.

Method

Study Instrument

A questionnaire was developed that included sections on ethnicity, leisure satisfaction, quality of life, and other socio-demographic information. In the first section of the questionnaire participants were asked: Which ethnic group do you most closely identify with? Would you say English, English-Canadian, Chinese, Chinese-Canadian, Irish, Irish-Canadian, Scottish, Scottish-Canadian, Welsh, Welsh-Canadian, Canadian, none of the above? Respondents who selected None of the above, chose not to answer, or did not know their ethnicity were ineligible to participate. Respondents who selected either Chinese or Chinese-Canadian were assigned to the Chinese/Canadian group whereas the remaining respondents were assigned to the British/Canadian group. The decision to describe these participants as British/Canadian was based on Statistics Canada's (1998) British Islander ethnicity category, as well as the agency's contention (Statistics Canada, 2003) that much of the increase in the reporting of “Canadian” in the 2001 census was done by individuals who had reported English in previous censuses. In the second section participants reported how frequently six needs were met during their leisure: (a) psychological; (b) educational; (c) social; (d) relaxation; (e) physiological; and (f) aesthetic (Beard & Ragheb, 1980). In the third section participants reported how satisfied or dissatisfied they were with: a) their life as a whole, b) standard of living, c) personal health, d) achieving in life, e) personal relationships, f) personal safety, g) community connectedness, h) future security, and i) spirituality/religion (i.e., the Perceived Wellbeing Index or PWI; International Wellbeing Group, 2006). They also responded to two statements concerning their level of happiness and two statements concerning their level of peacefulness based on the Lyubomirsky and Lepper's (1999) work.

All of the measures except the PWI were translated from English into simplified Chinese by one individual. A second individual who had not seen the original English-language questionnaire then translated it from simplified Chinese back into English. The original English-language questionnaire and the translated English-language questionnaire were compared and revisions were made (i.e., back-translation; Brislin, 1970). Because the PWI had been back-translated (Lau, Cummins, & McPherson, 2005) it was not translated again, but a Chinese assistant translated Lau's et al. version into English, which was compared with the original English-language PWI. No differences were found between the two.

Study Sample

A quota of approximately 600 study participants composed of near equal numbers of British/Canadian and Chinese/Canadian males and females was chosen apriori based on power considerations (Cohen, 1988). Potential British/Canadian participants were selected using a computer-generated sample and a random digit dialing approach. Potential Chinese/Canadian participants were selected based on Yida's (as cited in Yan, 2002) research on the 100 most common surnames in China and the various alternate spellings that exist (e.g., Zhang, the third most common surname in China, can also be spelled Chang, Cheong, Cheung, Chiang, Cheung, or Teoh depending upon the dialect; Chinese Roots, 2003). A list of 883 Chinese surnames was subsequently developed and a random sample of 3,253 listed telephone numbers assigned to people with these surnames was obtained from a telecommunications company.

Data were collected by the University of Alberta Population Research Lab from its centralized Computer-assisted Telephone Interviewing (CATI) facilities. Along with English-speaking interviewers, Cantonese- and Pŭtōnghuà (i.e., Mandarin)-speaking interviewers were scheduled for each shift. A pretest with 24 respondents was conducted to determine any wording, organization, or language issues.

To obtain the desired number of British/Canadian participants for the study, 2,877 telephone numbers were called. Many of these subsequently were excluded for various reasons including: being ineligible (e.g., out of service, business/fax, quota full, n = 1,107), screened (e.g., refusal, incomplete, n = 703), unscreened (e.g., busy, no answer, answering machine, n = 680), or undetermined (e.g., call back, n = 84). To obtain the desired number of Chinese/Canadian participants, 1,607 telephone numbers were called with many of these numbers excluded for various reasons including: being ineligible (e.g., out of service, business/fax, quota full, n = 254), screened (e.g., refusal, incomplete, n = 474), unscreened (e.g., busy, no answer, answering machine, n = 505), or undetermined (e.g., call back, n = 62). In total, 303 British/Canadian and 312 Chinese/Canadians completed interviews. Thus, the overall response rates (i.e., completed interviews divided by completed interviews and screened numbers) were 30% for British/Canadians and 40% for Chinese/Canadians. Reasons given for refusing to participate included a lack of time and/or interest and, with the Chinese/Canadian quota, a few language-related issues (e.g., interviewee spoke a regional dialect.)

To forestall concerns about the study's ethnic groupings being overly broad, which is a critique often and accurately aimed at our field (Stodolska & Yi-Kook, 2005), British/Canadian participants who reported that their preferred language was not English and/or who were not born in Canada, and Chinese/Canadian participants who reported their preferred language was not English, Chinese, Cantonese, or Pŭtōnghuà (i.e., “Mandarin”) and/or who were not born in Canada, Hong Kong, or Mainland China were excluded.

Data Analyses

Data analysis consisted of six stages:

1.	After excluding respondents who did not meet the above criteria, chi-square tests were calculated on the remaining British/Canadian and Chinese/Canadian participants' socio-demographic characteristics.
2.	Means and standard deviations for the happiness, peacefulness, quality of life, and leisure satisfaction measures were computed by ethnicity.
3.	To examine the reliability of the happiness, peacefulness, and leisure satisfaction scales standardized Cronbach coefficient alphas were calculated for each by ethnicity. Equality of the reliability coefficients was subsequently tested to determine if the corresponding scales' psychometric properties were similar (van de Vijver & Leung, 1997).
4.	A composite leisure satisfaction measure calculated by averaging all six leisure satisfaction dimensions by ethnicity was developed. Means, standard deviations, Cronbach coefficient alphas, and reliability coefficients by ethnicity were computed for the overall leisure satisfaction scale.
5.	Happiness, peacefulness, and the nine quality of life indices were each regressed, using hierarchical multiple regression, by sex, then by ethnicity, and then by overall leisure satisfaction. This sequence followed Cohen, Cohen, West, and Aiken's (2003) recommendations for entering blocks of regressors beginning with more distal causes and gradually adding more proximal causes. Probability levels for changes in the R2's after overall leisure satisfaction were also calculated.
6.	Canonical correlations were performed between happiness and peacefulness and eight QOL indices by ethnicity. (Quality of life as a whole was not included to determine which specific QOL domains were associated with happiness and peacefulness.) In canonical correlation there are several variables on both sides (vs. on only one side in multiple regression) and, consequently, several ways exist to recombine the variables on both sides to relate them to each other (Tabachnick & Fidell, 2006). Each significant combination (i.e., “root”) was examined to determine which variables on both sides had high canonical coefficients. Variables having the same signs (i.e., both positive or both negative) indicated a positive correlation whereas those having different signs (i.e., one positive and one negative) indicated a negative correlation.

Results

After excluding participants who did not meet the study's stated criteria, 261 Chinese/ Canadians (131 males and 130 females) and 258 British/Canadians (131 males and 127 females) remained. Chi-square tests indicated significant differences between the two groups for: a) age, χ² (4, N = 519) = 24.48, p < .0001, V = .2172, due mostly to more Chinese/Canadians being in the 35 to 49 age group and more British/Canadians being in the 50 and over age group, b) marital status, χ² (4, N = 517) = 41.16, p < .0001, V = .2822, due to the higher number of common-law and divorced or separated British/Canadians compared with Chinese/Canadians) income level, χ² (4, N = 414) = 33.10, p < .0001, V = .2827, due largely to the higher number of Chinese/Canadians earning under $25,000 Canadian and the higher number of British/Canadians earning more than $75,000 Canadian, and d) education level, χ² (11, N = 517) = 47.21, p < .0001, V = .3022, due primarily to the higher number of British/Canadians who had completed community college and the lower number of Chinese/Canadians who had not. As noted earlier, only British/Canadians born in Canada were included. In contrast, the majority of Chinese/Canadian participants were born in Mainland China (57%), followed by Hong Kong (25%) and Canada (18%). Of the Chinese/Canadians who were born elsewhere, 70% had moved to Canada since 1989.

Means, standard deviations, standardized Cronbach coefficient alphas, and reliability coefficients are reported for the happiness, peacefulness, and QOL items and scales (Table 1) and for the leisure satisfaction items and scales (Table 2). One item (“My spare time activities are physically challenging”) was dropped from the physiological leisure satisfaction so all scale coefficient alphas were near or above accepted levels (i.e., .6; Nunnally, 1967; .5, Schmitt, 1996), especially when the number of constructs being measured is taken into account (Cronbach & Gleser, 1965). Equality of the happiness, peacefulness, and leisure satisfaction scales' reliability coefficients was tested using van de Vijver and Leung's (1997) recommended procedure. Two leisure satisfaction scales' (i.e., social and relaxation) Cronbach coefficient alphas differed significantly between the two ethnic groups, but in both cases Chinese/Canadians were higher than British/Canadians. Thus, whereas the reliability coefficients for the other scales suggested construct equivalence (van de Vijver & Leung, 1997), this finding could mean that Chinese/Canadians viewed these two leisure satisfaction dimensions differently than British/Canadians (van de Vijver & Leung, 1997). Without further research on this possibility, however, all six leisure satisfaction dimension scales were included in the remaining analyses.

TABLE 1 Happiness, Peacefulness, and Quality of Life Items by Ethnicity

	British/Canadian			Chinese/Canadian
Scale and Items	M	SD	Alpha	M	SD	Alpha	F-Ratio
Happiness	5.33	1.05	.81	5.24	0.99	.80	0.95
How would you rate your personal happiness?
How would you rate your personal happiness compared with your peers?
Peacefulness	5.20	1.09	.77	4.99	1.04	.87	0.86
How would you rate your personal calmness?
How would you rate your personal calmness compared with your peers?
Quality of Life (“How satisfied are you with…”)
Your life as a whole?	7.42	1.72	—	6.99	1.56	—	—
Your standard of living?	7.67	1.86	—	7.08	1.66	—	—
Your health?	7.15	2.20	—	7.14	1.62	—	—
What you are achieving in life?	7.35	1.82	—	6.39	1.88	—	—
Your personal relationships?	7.55	2.15	—	7.50	1.61	—	—
How safe you feel?	7.91	1.79	—	7.64	1.61	—	—
Feeling part of the community?	6.68	2.19	—	6.48	1.83	—	—
Your future security?	7.39	1.99	—	7.05	1.71	—	—
Your spirituality or religion?	7.35	2.23	—	6.83	2.12	—	—
Note. Happiness and peacefulness measured on a 7-point scale (i.e., 1 = not very happy; 7 = very happy). Quality of life measured on an 11-point scale (i.e., 0 = completed dissatisfied; 10 = completely satisfied).
* p < .05.

TABLE 2 Leisure Satisfaction Items by Ethnicity

	British/Canadian			Chinese/Canadian
Scale and Items	M	SD	Alpha	M	SD	Alpha	F-Ratio
Psychological	4.01	0.73	.68	3.23	0.90	.72	1.14
My spare time activities give me self-confidence
I use many different skills and abilities in my spare time activities
My spare time activities give me a sense of accomplishment
Educational	3.80	0.70	.66	3.48	0.73	.71	1.17
My spare time activities increase my knowledge about things around me
My spare time activities help me learn about myself
My spare time activities help me learn about other people
My spare time activities provide opportunities to try new things
Social	4.03	0.76	.66	3.64	1.00	.79	1.62****
I have social interactions with others through my spare time activities
My spare time activities have helped me develop close relationships with others
The people I meet in my spare time activities are friendly
Relaxation	4.28	0.69	.71	3.99	0.72	.79	1.38**
My spare time activities contribute to my emotional wellbeing
My spare time activities help me reduce stress
My spare time activities help me relax
Physiological	3.81	1.00	.83	3.82	0.87	.84	1.06
My spare time activities develop my physical fitness
My spare time activities help me to stay physically healthy
My spare time activities are physically challenging (D)
Aesthetic	3.55	0.73	.62	3.41	0.68	.59	0.93
The areas or places where I engage in my spare time activities are beautiful
The areas or places where I engage in my spare time activities are fresh and clean
The areas or places where I engage in my spare time activities are well-designed
Note. Leisure satisfaction measured on a 5-point scale (i.e., 1 = strongly disagree; 5 = strongly agree). A “D” following a scale item indicates deletion.

Means and standard deviations for British/Canadians and Chinese/Canadians' overall leisure satisfaction scale were M = 3.92, SD = 0.53 and M = 3.63, SD = 0.58, respectively. The standardized Cronbach coefficient alphas did not differ significantly (British/Canadians = 0.80; Chinese/Canadians = 0.82; reliability coefficient F-ratio = 1.11).

Happiness, peacefulness, and the nine quality of life domains were each regressed using hierarchical multiple regression by sex, then ethnicity, and then overall leisure satisfaction (see Table 3). In step one, sex was significant, t (1, 491) = 2.17, p < .05 only for community connectedness, with females being higher than males. In step two, sex remained significant for community connectedness after ethnicity was entered (t [414] = 1.99, p < .05; t [414] = −0.49, p > .05, respectively), whereas ethnicity was significant for (a) life as a whole (t [414] = −2.97, p < .01); (b) standard of living (t [414] = −3.41, p < .001); (c) achieving in life (t [414] = −4.60, p < .0001); (d) future security (t [414] = −1.97, p < .05); (e) spirituality/religion (t [414] = −2.47, p < .05); and (f) peacefulness (t [414] = −2.00, p < .05). Negative betas indicated these six variables were all higher for British/Canadians. In step three, sex was no longer significant in any of the regressions whereas ethnicity was significant only for life as a whole, t (1, 388) = −2.23, p < .05, standard of living, t (388) = −2.28, p < .05, and achieving in life, t (388) = −3.19, p < .01. Overall leisure satisfaction was significant not only for these three variables (t [388] = 3.41, p < .001; t [388] = 4.12, p < .0001; t [388] = 5.32, p < .0001, respectively), but also for personal health (t [388] = 2.61, p < .01); personal relationships (t [388] = 4.51, p < .0001); personal safety (t [388] = 4.11, p < .0001); community connectedness (t [388] = 6.25, p < .0001); future security (t [388] = 5.93, p < .0001); spirituality/religion (t [388] = 3.72, p < .001); happiness (t [388] = 4.74, p < .0001); and peacefulness (t [388] = 3.36, p < .001). In all instances the addition of overall leisure satisfaction resulted in significantly increased R ²'s, ranging from .01 for personal health to .08 for future security and community connectedness.

TABLE 3 Hierarchical Regression Analyses Predicting Happiness, Peacefulness, and Quality of Life

Regressor and predictor variable(s)	ß^1	ß^2	ß^3	R ^2	Δ R ^2
Happiness
Sex	0.05	0.07	−0.02	.00
Ethnicity		−0.10	0.00	.00	.00
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.41****	.05	.05****
Peacefulness
Sex	−0.15	−0.12	−0.18	.00
Ethnicity		−0.21*	−0.16	.01	.01
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.31***	.04	.03****
Life as a whole
Sex	0.02	0.20	0.08	.00
Ethnicity		−0.47**	−0.36*	.02	.02
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.47***	.05	.03****
Standard of living
Sex	−0.01	0.11	−0.01	.00
Ethnicity		−0.58***	−0.40*	.02	.02
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.63****	.06	.04****
Personal health
Sex	−0.17	−0.04	−0.12	.00
Ethnicity		−0.03	0.07	.00	.00
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.44**	.01	.01**
Achieving in life
Sex	0.08	0.217	0.07	.00
Ethnicity		−0.80****	−0.57**	.05	.05
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.82****	.11	.06****
Personal relationships
Sex	0.02	0.21	0.08	.00
Ethnicity		−0.07	0.09	.00	.00
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.74****	.05	.05****
Personal safety
Sex	−0.10	−0.10	−0.16	.00
Ethnicity		−0.13	0.08	.00	.00
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.60****	.04	.04****
Community connectedness
Sex	0.38*	0.39*	0.14	.01
Ethnicity		−0.10	0.25	.01	.00
Overall leisure satisfaction			1.06****	.09	.08****
Future security
Sex	−0.19	−0.07	−0.26	.00
Ethnicity		−0.36*	−0.05	.01	.01
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.95****	.08	.07****
Spirituality/religion
Sex	0.36	0.52*	0.33	.00
Ethnicity		−0.52*	−0.43	.02	.02
Overall leisure satisfaction			0.71***	.06	.04****

Table 4 reports the results of the canonical correlations between happiness and peacefulness and eight QOL domains (excluding life as a whole) by ethnicity. Only one root was significant for British/Canadians with happiness and achieving in life both having positive canonical coefficients (0.93 and 0.43, respectively) equal to or greater than 0.40 (i.e., 16% of variance). Two roots were significant for Chinese/Canadians with happiness and personal relationships both having positive canonical coefficients in the first root (0.92 and 0.43, respectively). In the second root, however, happiness and peacefulness were negatively correlated (−0.59 and 1.08, respectively) and happiness was positively correlated with personal relationships (−0.94) and, to a lesser extent, with future security (−0.40). Peacefulness was positively correlated with spirituality/religion (0.51) and community connectedness (0.46).

TABLE 4 Standardized Canonical Coefficients Between Affective and Quality of Life Variables

		Chinese/Canadian
Variable	British/Canadian Root 1	Root 1	Root 2
Affective
Happiness	0.93	0.92	−0.59
Peacefulness	0.11	0.17	1.08
Quality of life
Standard of living	0.17	0.20	−0.28
Personal health	0.16	0.22	0.14
Achieving in life	0.43	0.03	0.34
Personal relationships	0.20	0.43	−0.94
Personal safety	0.07	0.13	0.34
Community connectedness	0.22	0.21	0.46
Future security	0.05	−0.12	−0.40
Spirituality/religion	0.14	0.34	0.51
Eigenvalue	0.73****	1.00****	0.11**
Canonical correlation	0.65	0.71	0.32
Percent of variance	0.42	0.50	0.10

Discussion

The purpose of this study was to examine how ethnicity and leisure satisfaction affected people's happiness, peacefulness, and quality of life. Hierarchical multiple regressions indicated that although sex had no significant effect on any QOL indicators, ethnicity significantly affected standard of living, achieving in life, and life as a whole, and overall leisure satisfaction significantly affected happiness, peacefulness, and all nine of the QOL domains. Finding that ethnicity affected standard of living was not surprising given that social inequality, as measured by income, is well-documented between Canadians and Chinese/Canadians (Li, 2003). In addition, researcher (e.g., Kau & Wang, 1995; Uchida, Norasakkunkit, & Kitayama, 2004) suggested that achievement may be less important for Asians than Westerners, at least in terms of personal (vs. social) achievement as was measured in our study (i.e., “How satisfied are you with what you are achieving in life?”). Uchida and colleagues (2004) noted several significant cross-cultural differences between North Americans and East Asians. Specifically, North Americans defined happiness in terms of personal achievement whereas East Asians did so in terms of interpersonal connectedness. This discovery was congruent with Kau and Wang's (1995) finding that large amounts of money and material possessions were the two least important life domains of Singaporeans. Finally, researchers (e.g., Diener et al., 2003; Shek et al., 2005) found that Asians may view satisfaction differently than Westerners. This finding may account for our discovery that Chinese/Canadians reported that life as a whole was less satisfying compared with British/Canadians. In a review of cultural differences and subjective well-being Diener et al. discovered that Asian Americans were less satisfied with their lives when compared to European Americans. They noted that “European Americans' life satisfaction judgment of the week as a whole was significantly higher than the average of their daily satisfaction during the same seven days, whereas Asian Americans' life satisfaction of the week as a whole was almost identical to the average of their daily satisfaction” (Diener et al., p. 411). One explanation offered by Diener et al. for this finding is the notion of self-serving biases (i.e., putting oneself in a more favorable light), which has been reported to be less frequent among East Asians. Shek et al. suggested, however, that satisfaction might be less important for Chinese because of their emphasis on forbearance, endurance, and contending mentality. On the other hand, our findings support previous research that has demonstrated the important role leisure satisfaction has on Chinese people's well-being (Hills & Argyle, 1998; Lloyd & Auld, 2002; Lu & Hu, 2005). Although our study's small effect sizes (Cohen, 1988) offers limited empirical support for this proposition, we would disagree based on the following rationale. Specifically, our findings were comparable with Lu and Hu (2005) who also found that leisure satisfaction had a significant effect on Chinese peoples' happiness with a similar effect size improvement (i.e., Δ R² = .07). In contrast with our study, however, Lu and Hu included personality traits before leisure satisfaction in their regression, and it was the former that was the best predictor of happiness (i.e., Δ R ² = .29). According to Lyubomirsky et al. (2005), because personality traits are relatively stable and because two of these traits (i.e., extraversion and neuroticism, the traits measured by Lu & Hu; 2005) are known to affect well-being, people may maintain the same level of happiness over time (McCrae & Costa, 1990). Genetic-behavioral research and research on hedonic adaptation (Frederick & Loewenstein, 1999) also supported the existence of a set “happiness point.” On the other hand, Lyubomirsky et al. proposed ways of raising this point to some degree through engagement in “intentional activities” that are flexible, self-congruent, self-determined, intrinsically appealing, and socially supported. A comparison of these factors with some of the leisure satisfaction items used in this study (e.g., “My leisure activities provide opportunities to try new things;” “My leisure activities are very interesting to me;” “My leisure activities have helped me develop close relationships with others”) suggests they are similar. Thus, when these variables are satisfied through leisure, people's happiness and, potentially, their peacefulness and QOL is raised at least somewhat above their trait-, genetic-, and hedonic-determined levels.

Missing from Lyubomirsky and colleagues' (2005) discussion but mentioned in an earlier article (Sheldon & Lyubomirsky, 2004), is the potential moderating effect cultural membership could have on the relationship between intentional activity and happiness. They proposed that in collectivist cultures, acting in service of others and thus satisfying relatedness needs may be more important than acting in service of personal achievement and goals, which satisfies competence needs. Results of our study's canonical correlations provide some support for this proposition as happiness was associated with only achieving in life for British/Canadians but primarily personal relationships for Chinese/Canadians.

Peacefulness, too, was examined based on Tsai et al.'s (2006, 2007) research that has shown Chinese people prefer low arousal positive emotions. Although overall leisure satisfaction was a better predictor of happiness than peacefulness, peacefulness and spirituality/religion were positively correlated for Chinese/Canadians. This discovery is consistent with Tsai's et al. (2007) finding that Asian religions emphasize emotions such as calm more than Western religions. In contrast, while personal relationships were positively correlated with happiness for Chinese/Canadians, they were negatively correlated with peacefulness. One explanation is possible for this paradox. Although interpersonal relatedness is a fundamental need (Deci & Ryan, 2000) that when satisfied results in happiness, in Chinese culture successful personal relationships are based on social harmony, and social harmony is a result of successfully fulfilling one's roles, duties, and obligations (Gao, 1996), trying to satisfy the need for interpersonal relatedness may mitigate or even negate a Chinese individual's sense of peacefulness. Tafarodi, Lo, Yamaguchi, Lee, and Katsura's (2004) finding that East Asian students felt better able to express themselves when they were engaged in solitary hobbies or during free time spent alone, compared with Canadian students, supports this explanation.

Conclusion

Because “a major goal of recreation and leisure services is to contribute to individuals' satisfaction and pursuit of happiness” (Beard & Ragheb, 1980, p. 21) practical implications can be described. First, for British/Canadians' happiness, ensuring leisure satisfaction occurs in conjunction with goal achievement seems worthwhile. Given this ethnic group's propensity for high arousal positive affect (Tsai et al., 2006, 2007) as well, active sport, fitness, and outdoor activities would seem particularly appropriate. Second, for Chinese/Canadians' happiness, ensuring leisure satisfaction occurs in conjunction with personal relationships of a certain type seems worthwhile. Given this ethnic group's propensity for low arousal positive affect (Tsai et al., 2006, 2007), social activities involving “equals” and that are relatively sedentary would seem most appropriate (e.g., mahjong with friends). Third, Lyubomirsky's et al. (2005) concept of “intentional activities” should be of great interest to recreation practitioners. Lyubomirsky et al. described this type of activity as self-determined, intrinsically appealing, and socially supported. This description seems congruent with experience- and benefits-based management approaches to leisure provision (Moore & Driver, 2005). Finally, recreation practitioners should not be discouraged if the activities and opportunities they provide do not elicit huge increases in happiness. Instead, they should remain optimistic knowing that their efforts have the ability to positively impact people's lives by increasing their happiness levels above and beyond the invariant factors of heredity and personality.

Paraphrasing Beard and Ragheb (1980), another major goal of recreation and leisure services should be to contribute to individuals' satisfaction and pursuit of peacefulness. Study findings suggest that leisure satisfaction does facilitate this affective state, albeit less so than for happiness. Moreover, our results provide more insight into the QOL domains associated with peacefulness for Chinese/Canadians than for British/Canadians. Specifically, for Chinese/Canadians, ensuring leisure satisfaction occurs in conjunction with spirituality/religion or community connectedness, or both, would seem worthwhile. Thus, recreation practitioners could, for example, organize trips to nearby parks or greenspaces to facilitate the former domain since nature is an important element in Taoism (Wang & Stringer, 2000) or trips to watch major community sport and cultural events to foster the latter domain. Regardless of the type of event, because personal relationships can negatively affect peacefulness, recreation practitioners can try to make the activity as socially informal and nonhierarchical as possible.

Future research on ethnicity, leisure satisfaction, and quality of life is recommended not only for the practical reasons outlined above but also for the conceptual and theoretical benefits that could be accrued (Valentine, Allison, & Schneider, 1999). For example, further research is needed regarding how leisure satisfaction facilitates happiness and peacefulness, especially studies that are cross-cultural, longitudinal, or both (Lyubomirsky et al., 2005). The need for more research on relaxation and peacefulness has been recognized previously (Kleiber, 2000), but addressing this gap is more urgent given Tsai and colleagues' (2006, 2007) findings and this study's results. Research in this area should also expand its sampling to identify potential similarities or differences that may exist within Asian cultures and between Asian and North American cultures. Finally, research on how leisure participation (e.g., volunteering vs. gambling), leisure motivation (e.g., intrinsic vs. extrinsic), and leisure constraints affect leisure satisfaction, and how these effects are similar and different across ethnic and cultural groups is needed.

In conclusion, research must continue to examine the fundamental concepts of happiness, peacefulness, quality of life, and leisure satisfaction including how each of these is uniquely and commonly defined, understood, and measured and how relationships between and among these variables are similar and different across cultures. Developing this understanding is critical for social science and perhaps especially for leisure sciences in light of the socio-demographic sea change taking place in Canada and the United States.

Acknowledgments

The authors contributed equally to this article and are, therefore, listed alphabetically. Preparation of this article was supported by a grant to the second author from the Alberta Gaming Research Institute. The authors would also like to thank the University of Alberta Population Research Lab staff for their assistance collecting the data.

Notes

** p < .01.

**** p < .0001.

* p < .05.

** p < .01.

*** p < .001.

**** p < .0001.

** p < .01.

**** p < .0001.