Working and recreating with machines: Outdoor recreation choices among machine‐tool workers in western Pennsylvania

The relationship between work and leisure has most often been described in terms of three basic models. First, the spillover model suggests that one's choice of leisure is affected by interests and attitudes developed during work. Second, the compensation model holds that leisure choices are the opposite of one's work activities, thus providing satisfaction not realized in the work context. Third, according to the segmentation model, work and leisure are distinct life domains and do not interact. Occasionally, a fourth perspective is added: Work and leisure are mutually influential. Evidence for the first three perspectives is mixed. Moreover, there is a units‐of‐analysis problem in studying work and leisure; that is, what about work and leisure is comparable? A patterned socialization model of work and leisure that encompasses and augments these perspectives is presented in this article. Evidence from the outdoor recreation activities of a sample of workers in the machining and tooling industries of western Pennsylvania is consistent with the position that work and leisure influence each other and that both are the result of prior socialization. The units‐of‐analysis problem is solved to some extent for this group of informants by comparing their work with machines and their leisure experiences with machines. Finally, machinists who engage in more outdoor recreation activities using machines are more satisfied with their leisure, in general.

Keywords:

• compensation
• leisure
• machine‐based recreation
• outdoor recreation
• patterned socialization
• segmentation
• spillover
• work