Will I See Faces Like Mine?: Exploring Perceived Constraints to Outdoor Recreation Experiences at an HBCU

Abstract

The purpose of this qualitative study was to explore perceived constraints of structured outdoor recreation experiences for students attending a Historically Black College/University (HBCU). Data were collected from four focus group sessions. Grounded Theory was used to analyze the data and from an analysis of data, four themes emerged: 1. Family impact, 2. Companionship, 3. Social media and technology, and 4. HBCU and Black American cultures. This study confirmed the importance of social companionship and the need for relevant marketing strategies as motivators for Black student participation in outdoor recreation activities at this HBCU. A common thread among the groups, was the perception of Whiteness in outdoor spaces and its negative impact on outdoor recreation involvement.

Keywords

campus recreation leisure constraints model barriers to participation black students qualitative research perceptions

Introduction

Black students’ experiences and activities in college will influence them for the rest of their lives (Lee et al., 2001). An integral component to the college experience is overall student wellness. However, since college presents a new environment to most students it can cause rapid changes in their health (Harrington & Ickes, 2016). Therefore, developing healthy habits and routines can be vital to a college student’s success (Alexander & Vladislav, 2015). An outlet for students to improve their overall wellness is outdoor recreation. Participation in outdoor recreation, which is often offered as a program within Campus Recreation, has been correlated with positive academic performance, stronger social communities, and increased self-efficacy (Andre et al., 2017).

This is because outdoor recreation is linked to multiple social, psychological, and physical benefits, and provides opportunities for combining the benefits of physical activity and/or social interaction with the positive impacts of nature (Wilson & Christensen, 2012). For college students, these include developing a sense of community, positive wellness habits, and self-esteem while reducing anxiety, depression, and stress (Andre et al., 2017, p. 17; Breunig et al. 2010). In addition, outdoor participation at an early age can have an impact on a host of social determinant indicators such as health and wellness, public safety, juvenile justice, cognitive development, and outdoor stewardship (Outdoor Industry Association, 2020). However, researchers have found that outdoor recreation is not a popular campus recreation program at many universities (Forrester, 2014), and that Black people still have one of the lowest participation rates (9.4%) in outdoor recreation compared to other races and ethnicities (Outdoor Industry Association, 2020).

A dominant belief is that Black people participate less in outdoor recreation because of historical circumstances and environmental conditions, shaped by a variety of factors stemming from a history of racial oppression in and exclusion from outdoor spaces (Davis, 2019). In addition, Black people historically have had less access to leisure opportunities, which may still influence their behavior today (Fernandez et al., 2013). Further, Black people experience more constraints and barriers to participation in outdoor recreation compared to other ethnic populations (Bustam et al., 2011; Ghimire et al., 2014; Washburne & Wall, 1980).

Identification of these constraints to participation has been a driving force in the continued study of participation barriers faced by ethnic communities in their pursuit of outdoor recreation activities (Cerin et al., 2010; Dorwart et al., 2019) because they influence individuals” leisure preferences and participation (Crawford et al., 1987). Despite an aggregate increase in outdoor recreation participation, studies are continuously highlighting the lack of diversity within the industry (Johnson et al., 1998; Finney, 2014). Given the positive benefits of outdoor recreation participation, exploring how Black college students view outdoor recreation is valuable for campus recreation programs, other areas that support student development on campuses, and the broader outdoor recreation industry. Developing an understanding of how Black students perceive outdoor recreation could improve the management and coordination of campus recreation programs and benefit the entire student body. For instance, examining how Black students navigate or negotiate constraints to outdoor recreation involvement could inform marketing and facilitation strategies for all campus recreation programs. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to explore perceived constraints of structured outdoor recreation experiences for students attending a Historically Black College/University (HBCU). The goals of this research were to explore barriers to outdoor recreation involvement, analyze perceived benefits of outdoor recreation participation, and explore how students’ perceptions affected their outdoor recreation experiences.

Related Literature

Over the last thirty years, research focused on barriers to participation in outdoor recreation has increased (Crawford et al., 1987; Dorwart et al., 2019; Jackson, 2000; Metcalf et al., 2013; Perry et al., 2015; Shores et al., 2007; Washburne & Wall, 1980). Concurrently, researchers have made a concerted effort to understand the factors that influence low recreation participation rates in underrepresented populations often utilizing a marginality, critical race, or leisure constraints lens (Davis, 2019; Floyd, 1998; Lee et al., 2001; Taylor, 2018; Schwartz et al., 2011; Shinew et al., 2004; Wang & Wu, 2016; West, 1989). While there is a growing body of research focused on Black participation in recreation, there is a dearth of literature specifically discussing Black students’ participation in collegiate outdoor recreation. Those studies that have been conducted at HBCUs, typically highlighted the success of their intramural programs and failed to mention the status of other programs that are available (e.g., Price et al., 2016; Stier & Quarterman, 1992).

Hierarchical Model of Leisure Constraints

Central to this study, Crawford et al. (2009) proposed a model of hierarchical leisure constraints, seeking to identify a multitude of barriers people often face in their recreation participation choices. In turn this model provided a framework for the exploration of how subcultures negotiate leisure constraints. The leisure constraints model suggested three distinct constraints individuals face that affect their leisure involvement – intrapersonal, interpersonal, and structural.

Intrapersonal constraints deal with the psychological state of individuals. These internal factors affect one’s leisure preference and participation negatively (Godbey et al., 1991). Psychological conditions such as anxiety, depression and stress are intrapersonal barriers that can constrain individuals from participating in leisure activities (Wang & Wu, 2016). Other intrapersonal constraints might be prior socialization into leisure activities and perceived self-skill (Jeongsun, 2009). Similarly, often Black people do not view themselves as people who participate in outdoor recreation activities and this perception can be an intrapersonal constraint (Johnson et al., 1998). Research has shown that Black people have also experienced intrapersonal constraints such as lack of confidence, internal fear, and uneasiness as a barrier to their leisure participation (Ghimire et al., 2014; Johnson et al., 1998; Spillman, 2016; Stodolska et al., 2014)

Interpersonal barriers are the result of interactions between individuals (Wang & Wu, 2016). Interpersonal behaviors deal with social class, culture, and relationships with other individuals or groups. The result of interaction or lack of interaction that one faces results in interpersonal barriers (Jeongsun, 2009). People who face interpersonal barriers are unable to find suitable partners to engage in a leisure activity with (Godbey et al., 1991). Research has shown that Black people without a companion are twice as likely to not participate in outdoor recreation (Johnson et al., 1998), and that black participants prefer to be in large groups (eight or more) for social companionship (Grill et al., 2019).

Similarly, structural constraints are external factors out a person’s immediate control that impedes one’s participation in leisure activities. Constraints such as climate and season are uncontrollable structural barriers (Wang & Wu, 2016). Other structural barriers include availability of opportunity, financial resources, and work schedules (Jeongsun, 2009). Additionally, discrimination and segregation laws are two barriers that have historically affected Black people in visiting outdoor areas (Stodolska et al., 2014). Research has demonstrated that minoritized communities have faced many structural constraints to their participation in parks and recreation (Ghimire et al., 2014; Johnson et al., 1998; Stodolska et al., 2014).

Minoritized Communities in Outdoor Recreation

Historically, minoritized communities have faced various barriers to outdoor recreation activities such as time, money, language, and transportation (Ghimire et al., 2014). Racism and discrimination are also relevant factors. Robert Stanton, first Black American director of the National Park Service, stated:

If you say over and over again that Black folks don’t like parks because they’re not in the parks, the park service people begin to believe that and the Black people begin to believe it themselves… It becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy, to a lot of people’s satisfaction, quite candidly. (as cited in Finney, 2014 p. 101-102)

Research has shown that constraints to leisure may be more acute for people who are in non-dominant groups (Shores et al., 2007). Segregation and discrimination laws forbade Black people to freely visit public parks until the 1960’s (Lee et al., 2001). Once segregation laws were lifted from public parks, many Black families still did not go to public parks because of the possibility of conflict with White people (Ghimire et al., 2014; Shores et al., 2007). Many American outdoor recreation spaces were often viewed as hostile and “White territory” regardless of laws (Johnson et al., 1998; Washburne et al., 1980; West, 1989). Black people were deemed undesirable and heavily discouraged from visiting locations reserved for White people (Philipp, 1999; Johnson et al., 1998; Stodolska et al., 2014; Washburne et al., 1980; West, 1989).

This racism and discrimination had a profound influence on the next generation of Black children and their view of outdoor activities that persists today (OPR, 2020). Many Black youths were socialized by their parents that outdoor spaces were White spaces (Philipp, 1999). Philipp (1999) states:

If African American parents place a low value upon certain leisure activities based upon beliefs that African Americans are not welcome in these activities and places … their children are likely to understand the low value which has been assigned to these activities and places. (p.389)

In 2020, the Outdoor Participation Report found that while Black Americans comprise over 12% of the U.S. population they only account for slightly over nine percent of outdoor participation. “History indicates that adults who were not exposed to outdoor recreation as children are much less likely to become outdoor participants” (OPR, 2020, p. 12).

Economic constraints also played a critical role in Black people’s outdoor recreation participation. While not all Black people are low income, in the United States, Black Americans have historically had lower incomes on average than White Americans. The Pew Research Center (2014) reported Black families made on average nearly $28,000 dollars less than White families and were twice as likely to be poor. This wage gap creates an economic barrier for Black people related to their outdoor recreation participation. Lower incomes keep many people from being able to acquire certain resources needed to participate in outdoor recreation (Lee et al., 2001; Shwartz et al., 2011). Research has shown that people with lower incomes spend one-fifth the amount of the money on outdoor recreation as people from higher income backgrounds (Reiling et al., 1992; Scott et al., 1994). Research also states that high prices and fees in general can be discriminatory to people from lower income backgrounds (Reiling et al., 1992; Scott et al., 1994; Shwartz et al., 2011). Additionally, it is noteworthy that even with subsidized programming on college campuses, there can still be financial burdens such as purchasing proper equipment.

In conclusion, due to the wide range of constraints to leisure participation identified in previous research, the hierarchical model of leisure constraints was used to guide this study. This model has had a foundational contribution to leisure research and has the potential to lead to a greater understanding of the barriers to outdoor recreation participation Black individuals experience in contemporary society.

Methods

Nineteen (n = 19) Black undergraduates who attended a HBCU located in the southeastern United States participated in this study. There were four first years, four sophomores, seven juniors, and four seniors. Thirteen participants identified as women, six as men, and all as Black. The HBCU these students attended is a mid-sized university with an enrollment of approximately 6,500 undergraduate students. The Campus Recreation office has five professional staff members and between 10–30 student employees throughout the year. At the time of this study, the university’s outdoor recreation program had been in existence for two years and was led by a coordinator with additional program area responsibilities. The outdoor recreation program provided four to six trips each semester such as snow skiing, kayaking, sunset paddle boarding, nature hikes, and rock climbing.

After receiving IRB approval for the study, the researchers implemented a combination of purposeful sampling and snowball sampling in the recruitment process. The first recruitment step was collaborating with the university’s campus recreation program. Campus recreation staff identified students who had previously participated in outdoor recreation programs and sent them an email invitation to the focus groups. In the next step of the recruitment, university faculty were asked to advertise the focus groups during class. Interested students contacted a member of the research team to register for a specific session. At the end of each focus group, participants were asked to inform their peers about the study and share research team contact information. There were three to seven participants in each of the four sessions. Three members of the research team facilitated each focus group. One ensured recording devices were working and took notes. One served as the primary moderator. The third researcher assisted with moderating and collecting demographic information. Focus groups ranged from 45 min to one hour.

Instrumentation

Each focus group followed a semi-structured interview guide. The interview guide was constructed after an in-depth literature review pertaining to Black people in outdoor spaces and leisure constraints (Floyd, 1998; Johnson et al., 1998; Krefting, 1991; Price et al., 2016; West, 1998). Focus groups opened with defining outdoor recreation and sharing examples of activities such as hiking, camping, kayaking, and generally being active in nature. Participants then introduced themselves and shared their involvement at the university and their experience with outdoor recreation. Researchers asked questions about participants” outdoor recreation experiences and perceptions. For example, for those participants who did not participate, researchers asked them to think back to when they were younger and if they ever participated in outdoor activities? Researchers also asked the entire group to respond to “How does media shape how you perceive outdoor recreation?”, “What role does outdoor recreation play on campus?”, and “What factors influence your participation in outdoor recreation?”.

Data Analysis

A qualitative approach was used to explore the college students’ shared experiences of outdoor recreation. The coding process named segments of data with a label that simultaneously categorized, summarized, and accounted for each piece of data (Charmaz, 2006). The qualitative data analysis software MAXQDA 2018 was used to code and analyze the data. At the end of each session, the research team debriefed and made any necessary adjustments for future sessions. The data from the focus groups were transcribed verbatim and coded for emerging patterns and themes. To ensure confidentiality, participants were assigned a pseudonym during transcription. In addition to collecting initial data from the focus groups, four member checks were conducted with a key informant from each group. During member checks the key informant reviewed a transcript of the focus group and discussed initial observations found by the research team. Member checks were administered to clarify statements that were made during the focus group, to help triangulate the data, and to provide a more accurate understanding of the participants” perceptions of outdoor recreation.

Grounded theory coding allowed for continual coding throughout the process by beginning with initial coding and finishing with focused coding (Charmaz, 2006). All members of the research team developed initial codes from the focus group transcripts. The research team discussed initial codes along with reflective memos and developed focused codes. Focused coding allowed for the construction of categories and emerging themes. Theoretical saturation of the data was determined by analyzing focus group transcripts, focus group debriefing notes, key informant notes, and reflective memos. To confirm saturation, the research team triangulated focus group data collected with information from key informants and discussions with content experts (Carter et al., 2014).

Results

Four themes emerged related to outdoor recreation and students’ perceptions and experiences at this HBCU. They were family impact, companionship, social media/technology, and HBCU and Black American cultures. These results demonstrated the array of issues Black students at this HBCU negotiated when considering outdoor recreation participation.

Family Impact

Eighteen of the 19 participants stated that they participated in some sort of outdoor activity in their childhood. The activities ranged from playing outdoors with friends to fishing, swimming, and camping. When asked what motivated them to participate, most students said their parents and families were the main factors. Many participants said they participated in outdoor recreation because their parents either forced or strongly encouraged them to play outdoors. For example, Remy stated, “When I was younger, I actually hated outdoor activities. I had to do them because my parents forced me, my brother, and my sister to do it.” Similarly, Penelope said, “My parents were very strict about all of us staying outside … they didn’t want us sitting around the house. They were like, when the sun was up, you go outside.” Many others shared that their parents signed them up for camps or programs that had outdoor recreational activities such swimming, canoeing, and hiking.

When asked about motivation to participate in outdoor recreational activities, Charli stated that, “You got family members [and] that was it. That was my motivation.” While Jermaine expounded more, stating:

I just went fishing because somebody was like “hey let’s go fishing” and I would go fishing. While being around my cousins, we would always want to do something for the summer. So we would end up doing stuff like dirt biking, riding four wheelers and jumping on trampolines.

However, some participants stated that family was a constraint to participating in outdoor activities and others simply did not have a desire to pursue outdoor recreation activities when they were younger. When asked about outdoor experiences, Lisa explained that, “Black moms can be a little drastic. They [Black moms] would say “You ain’t going in that water and you ain’t doing that”.” Sean added to the conversation that, “Most [students] would rather stay inside and chill … I feel like their parents didn’t tell them “hey go outside, go hiking”.” Nicki stated that she did not participate in outdoor activities because of her family. She said, “My older brothers never wanted me to play with them, so I stayed in the house. I read a lot.” Nicki’s experience and the others mentioned had a lasting impact on these students’ and their perceptions of outdoor recreation involvement.

Some participants felt that their participation in outdoor recreation as young adults was influenced by the lack of family experiences. Participants thought that since they were not exposed to outdoor recreation during their childhood, they were less likely to participate as young adults. Charli stated, “If that’s not something your family did, [then] it’s not something you [will] do.” When talking about camping, several participants stated they had no interest in going camping because their parents never took them. Other students added that if you did not engage in outdoor activities when you were younger, then you would not think about doing them when you are older.

Companionship

In addition to having exposure to outdoor recreation, companionship was also a key motivator for participants. At this pivotal stage in their lives where freedom and friends were more prominent and influential, if those friends were not doing outdoor recreational activities neither were participants in this study. Many students discussed how companionship influenced their leisure time choices and the desire to be accompanied by friends emerged as a major theme. For most participants if a friend was not going to participate in an outdoor activity, then more than likely they would not participate either. Students agreed with the sentiment of Lisa’s statement, “It depends on your friends” as a reason they would want to participate in outdoor recreational activities. Nicki said that she would participate only if she had someone to participate with. Multiple students explicitly expressed they would only engage in outdoor activities if they were accompanied by a friend. “Your friends motivate you”, Penelope stated while discussing companionship. When asked if you would participate in an outdoor recreational activity, Penelope said, “Maybe if some of my friends said they were going to do it [or], if I get some of my friends to go with me.” While responding to the same question, Remy stated, “maybe, depends on like, you know, like they said, if my friends are interested.” Lisa said, “For one I don’t like bugs, so I kind of try not to do many outdoor things. But if the idea was brought up to me from a friend … I might consider it.” Others mentioned companionship because they wanted to know if people were going to attend events in general. When talking about a previous trip, Dominic said, “I’m all about numbers. To me it is all about how many people are going. If a lot of people are going, then I will go.”

Multiple participants felt that companionship was needed to feel comfortable. Jermaine best explained the collective thoughts by stating:

If you have friends or somebody to go with, it’s a higher chance [that you would go]. But if you are going with a group of people that you don’t know, you [would be] like “I ain’t going to go”.

Even though all students believed that companionship played a role in participating in certain activities, a lot of students suggested that it was more significant for some students than others. In each focus group, students agreed that men at this university have a desire for companionship more than the women. Several women stated they were open to participating in outdoor activities alone. Only one male said he would participate in the outdoor activities without going with a friend. Each group felt that men on campus had a “Crew Mentality” which refers to wanting to be with your friends during extracurricular activities. Overall, companionship was a theme that each student noticed affected their activity and participation levels.

Social Media/Technology

Participants also stated that social media and technology were major influences on their activities during college. Social Media/Technology emerged as a theme with three subthemes. These were Social Media Platforms, Advertisements, and Communication.

Social Media Platforms

With social media being as popular as it is, many participants expressed how it played a role in their participation. For instance, several students stated that seeing activities being performed on Snapchat, Instagram, and Twitter influenced their desire to participate in that activity. Several students discussed a class where they had to follow different outdoor recreational social media sites (e.g., @BrownPeopleCamping, Outdoorafro.com). Once they followed the sites, they were more inclined to participate in similar outdoor activities.

Many participants admitted that being able to show their experience on a social platform was a motivational factor to participate in outdoor activities. Dominic stated, “Does someone have a camera so we can show everybody what we’re doing? Because if it’s something crazy like zip lining, rope swinging, rock climbing, rock jumping, I want everyone to know.” Mia stated that she would participate in more outdoor activities and try different things “if someone could record it.” Capturing and documenting the experience was a motivating factor for more than half of the participants.

Conversely, students also said seeing their friends not doing outdoor activities on social media made them less likely to try hiking, camping, or similar activities. Dominic stated, “If you look on Snapchat, you see your friends not really doing [outdoor activities and] they’re in the house on the couch watching TV, so you don’t really feel motivated to go outside.” Other students agreed with Dominic’s statement.

Students discussed how advertisements in movies and television have swayed their desire to participate in outdoor recreation. Jermaine made the point that, “If you are watching TV and you don’t see any Black people going up a mountain or something, in your head “yeah Black people don’t do stuff like that” so you might not think about that.”

Mia expressed, “You’re not going to see too many Black people jump out of an airplane, sky diving or white-water rafting.” Penelope shared if you only see White people in outdoor recreation advertisements, you will naturally associate those activities with that race rather than just thinking the activity was open to everyone. Participants agreed that advertisements influence their thoughts about outdoor recreation.

Participants also stated that when they see Black celebrities such as Kevin Hart and Marshawn Lynch (who have popular outdoor recreation campaigns) participate in outdoor activities on television or social media, they do not consider it advertisement but rather entertainment. Further, they still do not associate Black people with outdoor recreation. Rather, they associate those types of campaigns with celebrity status.

Communication

Students also discussed the importance of using technology for communicating and promoting outdoor activities. Participants shared that they were not aware of when Campus Recreation events happened. Students agreed that the means of communication had to be current and up to date with what is most effective. Most participants said emailing students was no longer an efficient way to communicate these types of events. When the participants were told that a lot of the recreational advertisements were sent through email, Lisa stated, “we told you, nobody reads them”, and the entire focus group laughed and agreed. In another focus group, when alerted that recreational activities were sent through emails, Dominic said, “Oh, I’ll tell you right now college kids aren’t reading their emails” and everyone in the session agreed. Trina explained in her focus group that, “When I see events through emails, it’s always like that week. So, I’m like “WOW, [but] I can’t go”.” Participants agreed that Campus Recreation needs to utilize social media platforms to advertise events and services in order to effectively reach students.

HBCU and Black American Cultures

Black students comprise 76% of the student body at HBCUs (Palmer et al., 2015) and have a rich history of being in the fore front of most social and educational endeavors on their campuses. Students at this HBCU reported outdoor recreation is not instilled into the campus or Black American cultures and that this affected their willingness to try outdoor activities. Students described outdoor recreation as “non-existent” on this HBCU campus. Sean epitomized most students’ beliefs about the lack of participation on campus when he stated, “It’s culture.” Students expressed there was not a desire to participate in outdoor activities. Several factors arose such as a lack of exposure to outdoor recreation, other leisure time options, and the role of Greek organizations. Participants also stated that an association with Whiteness and a cautiousness about outdoor spaces were factors that affected their participation in outdoor activities. Students explained that lack of exposure to outdoor activities and not having experience played essential roles in why they did not participate. Jermaine summed up the thoughts of other students:

I feel like a lot of Black people don’t really have the … I guess growing up they didn’t really have the resources and stuff like that to actually go out and experience outdoor recreation like that. So now being older and trying to teach an [old] dog new tricks, you know, it’s hard for people to get out of their ways and go experience new things.

Others attributed the fact that there are so many options for student involvement on campus and in the community that might be more attractive to college students. Several participants commented that as they got older, and now as college students, they did not want to participate in outdoor activities. Shawna expressed that, “When you get older you want to do more mature things … like wine tasting.” Other students felt that having more options for leisure time activities contributed to their lack of participation in outdoor recreation. During a focus group, Sean hypothetically asked, “In reality, if your options are to go on a hiking trip or to go to the club in Charlotte, what are college students going to do?” Other participants agreed that the trip to Charlotte is the choice most college students would choose. Eve said college students do not participate because, “You have those other options. You have parties on the weekends.” Several students agreed that parties and hanging out with other friends were popular things to do in college and those students would rather do that than go on a camping trip. Participants agreed that if there were fewer options (e.g., alcohol, Wi-Fi, parties, etc.) on campus students might begin to participate in outdoor activities.

Students also discussed the role that campus culture, Black American culture, and the influence of Greek organizations. Nicki combined Black American culture and companionship with HBCU culture. When asked: “Is not participating in outdoor recreation embedded in HBCU or the general Black American culture?” Nicki responded:

I’m a freshman and I want to be all about the college experience. So, I might want to participate in various activities a little bit more than most students. But my friends, most of my friends are African American. They’re like “We don’t want do that, that’s too much outside stuff I want to participate but my friends don’t.

Participants suggested that if Campus Recreation wanted to increase participation in outdoor recreation, they should recruit Greek organizations. Mia expressed, “Incorporate it into Greek life. Ask some of them to participate in this so we can promote it a little bit more…”

Conversely, multiple participants discussed the history Black people in America have with outdoor recreation and the negative influence that history has on their outdoor recreation participation. The association of Whiteness with outdoor recreation was also mentioned by several participants. Jermaine stated, “I can’t speak for everybody in the room, but for me personally, when I talk to people they’re just like “man, you know only White people be doing outside” that’s normally what I get.” Kendrick said that, “the White community, they’re outdoorsy. They go out, they work out … running is something you always [see]. All my White friends run, they all run, they run in groups.” Several students agreed with these comments. Sean said he did not participate in outdoor recreation as much anymore because, “It’s like that White boy thing, you know. That’s White boy shit. White boys do that. When speaking about camping, Lisa stated that “I’d say camping is White people stuff … I’m not dying in the woods.”

Multiple students also shared how Black people were more “cautious” and “scared” than other races when considering outdoor recreation. For instance, Lisa stated, “Yeah, I think most times we’re too cautious … we miss out on things.” Several other students agreed that Black people sometimes missed out on certain fun outdoor activities because they are too uncomfortable or nervous to try them. Some students spoke about a fear of the unknown in nature and not participating in an outdoor activity. Regarding that topic, Nicki stated, “I think it’s the thing of just not knowing what’s in nature.” Other students spoke about the fact that their parents and grandparents were afraid of the outdoor spaces. Summarizing most of her peers, Charli stated, “A lot of older people think it’s not safe out there.” Similarly, Dominic said, “Negative things are happening. I don’t think people feel safe going out right now.” All things considered, there are multiple historical and contemporary issues that factor into outdoor recreation participation in the HBCU and Black American communities.

Discussion

All three dimensions of Crawford and Godbey’s (1987) leisure constraints model were reflected in the lived experiences of these study participants.

Intrapersonal

The main intrapersonal factor that constrained leisure participation among participants in this study was a fear of not belonging or being accepted in outdoor recreation activities. This fear was articulated when participants discussed the association of Whiteness to certain outdoor activities. Most participants associated certain outdoor activities and spaces with White individuals. Previous literature supported the findings that an association to race in recreation can deter individuals from participating in certain activities (Johnson et al., 1998; Parker & Green, 2016; Washburne et al., 1980; West, 1989). For instance, students associated activities like camping and jogging with Whites. Due to this connection, participants were less likely to participate in certain outdoor activities because they felt like they did not belong in those spaces.

Outdoor recreation is often identified as activities for non-Blacks or White-only activities. Many Black people stay away from these activities for fear of being surrounded by only White participants or even the fear of being seen as “acting” White (Erikson et al., 2009). In addition, Black people are less likely to participate in an outdoor recreation activity if there is the possibility of being singled out for being the only Black participant (Schwartz et al., 2011). Participants in this study expressed that they associated White people with outdoor activities because they see them so commonly in outdoor advertisements. This finding is consistent with previous research indicating that advertisements can affect a person’s perceptions (Bristor et al., 1995; Brown et al., 2016). Students also viewed famous Black people engaging in outdoor activities as entertainment rather than advertisement. Davis (2019) also postulated that, “African American presence in the outdoors can be easily overlooked if one only searches for black faces in white spaces” (p. 96). Similarly, in a study of magazine advertisements in great outdoor settings, D. Martin (2004) found that models in such advertisements were predominantly White and rarely included Black participants, noting that this “potentially has consequences for how Blacks and Whites perceive wilderness recreation and wilderness spaces” (D. Martin, 2004, p. 513). This notion of a dominant White identity in outdoor recreation has far too long plagued diverse participation and yielded a history of implicit deterrents among Black Americans.

Interpersonal

The reality the many Black people do not see themselves in the outdoors can also lead to interpersonal constraints. Nearly all students’ participation levels were negatively or positively affected by their family members. Philipp (1999) supports how significantly family can impact one’s leisure experience. Phillip explains children are directly and indirectly influenced by parents” actions. He also states parents” beliefs and perceptions about certain activities are instilled into their children. This acculturation leads children to value certain recreational activities more than others (Philipp, 1999; Sigel et al., 2016).

The need for companionship was also an interpersonal constraint participants shared. There is previous research that revealed it is common to desire companionship when participating in extracurricular activities (Ewert et al., 2013; Johnson et al., 1998; Rayburn, 2013; Schwartz et al., 2011) and participants in this study were no different. The interconnection between HBCU and Black American cultures and the need for companionship is important to mention. The data from this study revealed that finding companionship for outdoor recreation could be extremely difficult on a HBCU campus. While some Black students are interested in outdoor recreational activities, due to a plethora of leisure constraints, this type of recreation is not as popular as other leisure time activities.

Social identification is what influences interpersonal constraints to leisure behavior. At the core of these types of barriers for Black people is the ability to identify someone they can share and participate in certain outdoor recreation activities with. This type of support can be observed in spousal relationships, in the behavioral patterns of a parent child relationship, among individuals that live within the same ethnic community, or even among friends living in different areas (Iwasaki, 2001; Orsega-Smith et al., 2004). Relationships are crucial to increasing the levels at which Black American adults participate in outdoor recreation. For instance, one study found that Black people were twice as likely not to visit outdoor recreation areas if they were unable to find a suitable companion (Johnson et al., 1998). Many Black people do not identify with the outdoor recreation lifestyle and this lack of connection influences the preferences of individuals within interpersonal relationships.

Schwartz and Corkery’s (2011) study on barriers among underrepresented populations, noted that most of their respondents of color “stated they were from urban areas, had family that did not approve of their participation in outdoor activities, and had little to no early life exposure to outdoor recreation” (p.139). As a result, in their study, respondents found it difficult to involve themselves in outdoor programs if they were unable to identify with other students of color to lean on for social support.

In the first published descriptive study of Black American women regarding outdoor recreation experiences and constraints to participation, Roberts and Drogin (1993), found that “there is a need for encouragement from other women of color who have done such activities to aggressively encourage these women to try certain outdoor pursuits… African American women need to feel they are not the only Black person participating” (p.15). The desire to have someone to engage in, and enjoy outdoor recreation activities with, is a feeling many Black adults still know all too well (Ewert et al., 2013; Schwartz et al., 2011).

Structural

A lack of information on a level that was accessible to all Black students regarding outdoor recreation programs was frequently identified by participants. Students collectively deemed the structural strategies to provide information pertaining outdoor recreational activities as ineffective. Participants noted that if Campus Recreation could effectively promote programs more students would likely participate.

Many focus group members insisted that students did not participate in outdoor recreation due to the campus environment and community. Students expressed that HBCU campuses did not host an environment where outdoor recreation was prominent, nor instilled into the campus culture. Students suggested their attitudes and actions were merely a product of their environment. Research shows individuals behave the way in which their environment dictates and are influenced by their community (Reno, 2007; Wickrama et al., 2006, 2012). Students are influenced by the people they interact with and images they see on a daily basis. These encounters then lead to internalized perceptions based on the frequency of engagement and the importance individuals assign to them.

Participants shared they were influenced by their families and incorporated familial beliefs and fears into their personal ethos. Studies revealed parental beliefs can be instilled in children through observation of their parents” patterns and values (Buunk, 2015; McElhaney et al., 2008; Sigel et al., 2016). Participants agreed that Black Americans share a sense of caution regarding outdoor areas and activities and previous research indicates Black people share a fear of racial confrontation in outdoor spaces (Ghirmire et al., 2014; Johnson et al., 2001; Johnson et al., 1998; Lee et al., 2001). Notably participants did not discuss a fear of racial conflict. Rather they discussed a belief that they would not be accepted in outdoor recreation spaces. Both perceptions are related to societal beliefs and attitudes that Stodolska et al. (2020) discussed in their ecological model of leisure constraints. This model presents system level constraints which take a more nuanced view of structural constraints acknowledging that all constraints are interconnected.

Limitations

There were several limitations in this research study. The first limitation was the research may not provide adequate answers pertaining to all HBCUs. Although HBCUs share cultural similarities, each university still hosts distinct characteristics (e.g., student body size, location, campus recreation department size) that pertain specifically to their university. The distinct characteristics each HBCU possesses could potentially affect their students’ participation rates in outdoor recreation.

This research study may not provide adequate answers for students of other races and ethnicities that attend a HBCU because this research focuses specifically on Black students. Other races and ethnicities may potentially face different constraints and benefits regarding their outdoor recreation participation. Finally, participants in the focus groups may not have been forthcoming with their answers. Focus groups host an environment for participants to overshadow others or for participants to become timid while responding to questions.

Recommendations

Implications for Practice

The following three implications for practice arose from this study: trial days and informative pre-trip meetings, student involved marketing, and forming an outdoor recreation organization.

Trial Days and Informative Pre-Trip Meetings

Students in the focus groups stated there is a sense of caution for Black people participating in outdoor recreation activities. Therefore, trial days and informative pre-trip meetings would be beneficial for students who are hesitant to try different activities. For example, if a student is fearful of rock climbing, it could be beneficial to introduce them by going to an indoor rock-climbing wall and hosting a session where they learn about the basics of rock climbing. Then, when an outdoor rock-climbing trip is planned, students may be more willing to participate. For certain events when the means do not allow for the recreational programs to have a trial run or preliminary course, staff could conduct informative pre-trip meetings. In these meetings, campus recreation staff would provide realistic information for students and address any questions or concerns prior to the trip. The purpose of the meetings should be to make participants feel comfortable about the upcoming trip and ensure they are prepared (i.e., have the appropriate gear and supplies to enjoy the experience). Trial days and informative pre-trip meetings, allow students to become more knowledgeable about the outdoor recreational activity which should in turn lead to a more positive experience.

Student Involved Marketing

This study found that companionship was vital for students to have a positive outdoor recreation experience as well. A way that campus recreation professionals might increase the likelihood of having a critical number of students participating in outdoor recreational activities is to employ a student involved marketing approach. This approach would engage students in selecting outdoor recreation activities, ensuring advertisements are appealing, selecting the appropriate promotional platforms, and collaborating with other student organizations.

While many campus recreation departments are limited with the outdoor programs and experiences they can offer, engaging students to see what outdoor activities most interests them is an important step in developing an outdoor recreation program. Campus recreation staff might host focus groups, share a campus wide survey, or selectively survey those students currently in their programs to collect outdoor recreation program ideas. At HBCUs where outdoor recreation is not a common recreational pursuit, staff, with authentic student input, must take a market driven approach when developing program offerings.

It is important that a HBCU’s campus recreation department identify with their student body, and to do this well you must engage students. Participants in this study felt that outdoor recreation advertisements largely featured White people. For an HBCU, it could be beneficial for campus recreation to feature currently enrolled Black students in their advertisements. A tactic that could be used is capturing students already participating in outdoor recreational activities and using these pictures as advertisements for upcoming trips. Additionally, it is also important to promote programs in the most effective way. Participants in this study expressed that emails were not the most effective method of communication. Campus recreation staff along with student input and support should determine the best medium to share information on their campus. Students in this study stated it is important to relay the message by social media using Instagram, Snapchat, and Twitter. Creating a student staff position to coordinate a social media promotional plan or finding ways to develop a volunteer social media ambassador might assist professional staff with implementing a social media marketing plan.

Participants also stated that if Campus Recreation collaborated with the campus Greek organizations, more students would be willing to participate. Greek organizations play a large role on this HBCU campus. Many students broached the popularity of Greek organizations and how their events can bring out a lot of students. Collaborating with fraternities and sororities would raise awareness with different sectors of the campus community. In addition to partnering with Greek Life, campus recreation professionals could work with other campus student organizations based on recommendations from currently enrolled students. The collaboration with student organizations should be mutually beneficial for the student organization and the campus recreation department.

Forming an Outdoor Recreation Organization

Starting an outdoor recreation club or organization could be challenging but beneficial. This organization could introduce students to other students that are interested in outdoor recreation. This would help with the companionship factor students at HBCUs face. Having an organization of this nature hosting programs and trips will bring awareness to outdoor recreation on campus and if this organization hosts joint programs and events with other clubs on campus, it might draw interest from more students. Additionally, the organization could collaborate with outdoor organizations in the community to bring more diverse programming to campus. If these organizations were involved in the surrounding community, there may be a shift in the stereotypes Black people have regarding outdoor recreation participation. Families and children could begin associating Black faces in outdoor spaces because they see HBCU students in outdoor areas.

Implication for Future Research

The findings of this study were supported by previous literature which found that people from minoritized communities face multiple constraints related to outdoor recreation participation (Philipp, 1999; Martin 2016; Spillman, 2016; Washburne et al., 1980; West, 1989; Shores et al., 2007; Ghimire, et al., 2014). Future research could employ other theoretical perspectives to explore constraints. Incorporating other theoretical views of leisure constraints might advance our understanding of Black students’ experiences. Stodolska et al. (2020) presented an ecological model of leisure constraints that differs from Godbey et al.’s (1991) hierarchical model. In the ecological model, there are four, nested layers of constraints (individual, interpersonal, context, and system) and “each of these constraints” layers is interrelated and mutually dependent” (Stodolska et al., 2020, p. 549). Exploring constraints from this perspective might allow for a deeper understanding of the Black student s related to outdoor recreation.

Studies could also examine the benefits, or lack thereof, of participation in outdoor recreation with Black college students as well as examine multiple HBCUs and predominantly White institutions (PWI). Researchers could design a study around HBCU campus recreation programs and the benefits HBCU students acquire after participating in outdoor recreational activities. While the current study provides some insight into what limits Black students from participating in outdoor recreation, it does not explore the benefits Black students acquire after participation. Additional studies focused on perceptions, barriers, and benefits in relation to outdoor recreation participation at multiple HBCUs and PWIs could provide valuable insight into the lived experiences of students. Every HBCU has distinct characteristics and Black students at PWIs may have unique experiences due to their campus environment.

With regards to research methods, one on one interviews would be helpful for future research. In focus groups, there is the possibility of participants not being forthcoming or shy with answers because of their environment. Individuals in focus groups could potentially alter or change their answers because of the presence of their peers. Conducting one on one interviews will allow participants to share their thoughts and experiences in a setting where their answers cannot be influence by other participants.

In conclusion this study revealed that Black students are facing various perceived constraints to participating in outdoor recreation at this HBCU. Furthermore, it explored the thoughts and perceptions that Black students face while participating in outdoor recreational activities. It is our hope that this study sparks a conversation in campus recreation departments and serves as a catalyst to future outdoor programs and research focused on Black students’ involvement in outdoor recreation.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) disclosed receipt of the following financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article: This work was supported by the NIRSA Foundation, (grant number A17-0013-001).

ORCID iDs

Catherine E. Dorwart

Anthony F. Patterson

References

Alexander

Vladislav

(2015). Structure and content of the educational technology of managing students’ healthy lifestyle. Journal of Physical Education and Sport, 15(3), 362–364. https://doi.org/10.7752/jpes.2015.03054

Andre

E. K.

Williams

Schwartz

Bullard

(2017). Benefits of campus outdoor recreation programs: A review of the literature. Journal of Outdoor Recreation, Education, and Leadership, 9(1), 15–25. https://doi.org/10.18666/JOREL-2017-V9-I1-7491

Breunig

M. C.

O’Connell

T. S.

Todd

Anderson

Young

(2010). The impact of outdoor pursuits on college students’ perceived sense of community. Journal of Leisure Research, 42(4), 551–572. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2010.11950218

Bristor

J. M.

Lee

R. G.

Hunt

M. R.

(1995). Race and ideology: African American images in television advertising. Journal of Public Policy & Marketing, 14(1), 48–59. https://doi.org/10.1177/074391569501400105

Brown

Bennett

Ballouli

(2016). Examining the effects of advertisement setting and actor race on African Americans’ intentions to consume baseball. Sport Marketing Quarterly, 25(3), 139–151.

Bustam

Thapa

Buta

. (2011). Demographic differences within race/ethnicity group constraints to outdoor recreation participation. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration, 29(4), 53–71.

Buunk

A. P.

(2015). My parents know best: No mating with members from other ethnic groups. Interpersona: An International Journal on Personal Relationships, 9(1), 100–113. https://doi.org/10.5964/ijpr.v9i1.184

Carter

Bryant-Lukosius

DiCenso

Blythe

Neville

A. J.

(2014). The use of triangulation in qualitative research. Oncology Nursing Forum, 41(5), 545–547. https://doi.org/10.1188/14.ONF.545-547

Cerin

Leslie

Sugiyama

Owen

. (2010). Perceived barriers to leisure-time physical activity in adults: An ecological perspective. Journal of Physical Activity & Health, 7, 451–459.

10.

Charmaz

(2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage Publications.

11.

Crawford

D.W.

Godbey

. (1987). Reconceptualizing barriers to family leisure. Leisure Sciences, 9, 119–127.

12.

Crawford

D. W.

Jackson

E. L.

Godbey

(2009). A Hierarchical model of leisure constraints.

13.

Davis

(2019). Black faces, black spaces: Rethinking African American underrepresentation in wildland spaces and outdoor recreation. Nature and Space, 2(1), 89–109.

14.

Dorwart

C. E.

Patterson

A. F.

Cornelous

(2019). “Just more comfortable in the gym”; an exploration of the constraints that contribute to adult African American female’s lack of participation in outdoor recreation activities. Journal of Outdoor Recreation Education and Leadership, 11(3), 170–190. https://doi.org/10.18666/JOREL-2019-V11-I3-8878

15.

Erikson

Johnson

C.W.

Kivel

B. D.

(2009). Rocky mountain national park: History and culture as factors in African American park visitation. Journal of Leisure Research, 41(4), 529–545.

16.

Ewert

Gilbertson

Lou

Voight

(2013). Beyond because it’s there: Motivations for pursing adventure recreational activities. Journal of Leisure Research, 45(1), 91–111. https://doi.org/10.18666/jlr-2013-v45-i1-2944

17.

Fernandez

Witt

. (2013). Attracting Hispanics to a public recreation center: Examining intergroup tension and historical factors. Journal of Leisure Research, 45, 423–444.

18.

Finney

(2014). Black faces, White spaces: Reimagining the relationship of African Americans to the great outdoors. University of North Carolina Press.

19.

Floyd

M. F.

(1998). Getting beyond marginality and ethnicity: The challenge for race and ethnic studies in leisure research. Journal of Leisure Research, 30(1), 3–22. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1998.11949816

20.

Forrester

. (2014). The Benefits of Campus Recreation. Corvallis, OR: NIRSA.

21.

Ghimire

Green

G. T.

Poudyal

N. C.

Cordell

H. K.

(2014). An analysis of perceived constraints to outdoor recreation. Journal of Park and Recreation Administration, 32(4), 52–67.

22.

Grill

Morse

Schelhas

Barlow

Wyman

(2019). Implications of setting preference differences by race and gender on the applicability of a benefits-based management approach to recreation planning. JPRA, 1–19.

23.

Harrington

M. R.

Ickes

M. J.

(2016). Differences in health behaviors of overweight or obese college students compared to healthy weight students. American Journal of Health Education, 47(1), 32–41. https://doi.org/10.1080/19325037.2015.1111179

24.

Iwasaki

(2001). Contributions of leisure to coping with daily hassles in university students’ lives. Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 33(2), 128–141. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0087135

25.

Jackson

E. L

. (1991). Special issue introduction: Leisure constraints/constrained leisure. Leisure Sciences, 13, 273–278.

26.

Jackson

E. L.

(2000). Will research on leisure constraints still be relevant in the twenty-first century? Journal of Leisure Research, 32(1), 62–68. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2000.11949887

27.

Jeongsun

(2009). Three-factor model and pyramid model of leisure constraints. Journal of Travel and Tourism Research, 9(2), 122–138.

28.

Johnson

C. Y.

Bowker

J. M.

Cordell

H. K.

(2001). Outdoor recreation constraints: An examination of race, gender and rural dwelling. Southern Rural Sociology, 17, 111–133.

29.

Johnson

C. Y.

Bowker

J. M.

Donald

B. K.

Worthen

(1998). Wildland recreation in the rural south: An examination of marginality and ethnicity theory. Journal of Leisure Research, 30(1), 101–120. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1998.11949821

30.

KangJae

J.L.

Fernandez

Scott

Floyd

(2022) Slow violence in public parks in the U.S.: Can we escape our troubling past? Social & Cultural Geography, https://doi.org/10.1080/14649365.2022.2028182

31.

Krefting

(1991). Rigor in qualitative research: The assessment of trustworthiness. American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 45, 214–222. https://doi.org/10.5014/ajot.45.3.214

32.

Lee

Scott

Floyd

(2001). Structural inequalities in outdoor recreation participation: A multiple hierarchy stratification perspective. Journal of Leisure Research, 33(4), 427–449. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2001.11949953

33.

Martin

D. C

., (2004). Apartheid in the great outdoors: American advertising and the reproduction of a racialized outdoor leisure identity. Journal of Leisure Research, 36(4), 513–535.

34.

Martin

(2016, October 5). More minorities are hiking and camping-good news for makers of outdoorsy gear. Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/business/la-fi-camping-minorities-20161005-snap-story.html

35.

Metcalf

Burns

Graefe

. (2013). Understanding non-traditional forest recreation: The role of constraints and negotiation strategies among racial and ethnic minorities. Journal of Outdoor Recreation and Tourism, 1(2), 29–39.

36.

McElhaney

K. B.

Porter

M. R.

Thompson

W. L.

& Allen

J. P.

(2008). Apples and oranges: Divergent meanings of parents’ and adolescents’ perceptions of parental influence. Journal of Early Adolescence, 28(2), 206–229. https://doi.org/10.1177/0272431607312768

37.

Orsega-Smith

Mowen

A. J.

Payne

L. L.

Godbey

(2004). The interaction of stress and park use on psycho-physiological health in older adults. Journal of Leisure Research, 36(2), 232–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2004.11950021

38.

Outdoor Industry Association (2020). Outdoor Participation Report. https://outdoorindustry.org/resource/2020-outdoor-participation-report

39.

Palmer

R. T.

Maramba

D. C.

Allen

T. O.

Goings

R. B.

(2015). From matriculation to engagement on campus: Delineating the experiences of Latino/a students at a public historically black university. New Directions for Higher Education, 170, 67–78.

40.

Parker

S. E.

Green

G. T.

(2016). A comparative study of recreation constraints to national forest use by ethnic and minority groups in north Georgia. Journal of Forestry, 114(4), 449–457. https://doi.org/10.5849/jof.13-079

41.

Perry

Xiao

Manning

. (2015). Barrier or bridge? The role of transportation in national park visitation by racial and ethnic groups. World Leisure Journal, 57(3), 173–184.

42.

Pew Research Center (2014). Demographic trends and economic well-being. Retrieved from: http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2016/06/27/1-demographic-trends-and-economic-well-being/

43.

Philipp

S. F.

(1999). Are we welcome? African American racial acceptance in leisure activities and the importance given to children's leisure. Journal of Leisure Research, 31(4), 385–403. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.1999.11949873

44.

Price

A. A.

Miller

M. D.

Rendos

N. K.

(2016). If you build it will they come? HBCU student usage of a new recreation facility. Medicine & Science in Sports & Exercise, 48(5S), 1067–1068. https://doi.org/10.1249/01.mss.0000488212.88478.9d

45.

Rayburn

P. J.

(2013). Assessment of motivation and interest in outdoor recreation activities facilitated by a campus recreation center. California State University.

46.

Reiling

S. D.

Cheng

Trott

(1992). Measuring the discriminatory impact associated with higher recreational fees. Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 14(2), 121–137. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490409209513162

47.

Reno

J. B.

(2007). Rethinking horizon theory: Culture vs nature. Perspectives on Political Science, 36(2), 84–90. https://doi.org/10.3200/PPSC.36.2.84-90

48.

Roberts

Drogin

. (1993). The outdoor recreation experience: Factors affecting participation of African American women. The Journal of Experiential Education, 16(1), 14–16.

49.

Scott

Munson

. (1994). Perceived constraints to park usage among individuals with low incomes. Journal of Park & Recreation Administration, 12(4), 79–96.

50.

Schwartz

Robertson Corkery

(2011). Barriers to participation among underrepresented populations in outdoor programs. Recreational Sports Journal, 35(2), 130–144. https://doi.org/10.1123/rsj.35.2.130

51.

Shinew

Floyd

Parry

. (2004). Understanding the relationship between race and leisure activities and constraints: Exploring an alternative framework. Leisure Sciences, 26(2), 181–199.

52.

Shores

K. A.

Scott

Floyd

M. F.

(2007). Constraints to outdoor recreation: A multiple hierarchy stratification perspective. Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 29(3), 227–246. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400701257948

53.

Sigel

I. E.

McGillicuddy-DeLisi

A. V.

Goodnow

J. J.

(2016). Parental belief systems: The psychological consequences for children, 345–371. Psychology Press, Routledge.

54.

Spillman

(2016, September 28). For people of color, hiking isn’t always an escape: Nonwhite hikers sometimes forced to carry racial baggage on the trail. USA Today. Retrieved from http://www.usatoday.com/story/life/outdoors/recreation/2016/09/28/people-color-hiking-isnt-always-escape/91202800/

55.

Stier

W. F.

Quarterman

(1992). Characteristics of physical education faculty in historically black colleges and universities (HBCUs). Physical Educator, 49(2), 73–80.

56.

Stodolska

Shinew

Camarillo

(2020). Constraints on recreation among people of color: Toward a new constraints model. Leisure Sciences, 42(5-6), 533–551. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490400.2018.1519473

57.

Stodolska

Shinew

Floyd

Walker

(2014). Race, ethnicity, and leisure: Perspectives on research, theory, and practice. Human Kinetics

58.

Taylor

(2018). Racial and ethnic differences in connectedness to nature and landscape preferences among college students. Environmental Justice, 11(3), 118–136. https://doi.org/10.1089/env.2017.0040

59.

Wang

(2016). Identifying leisure constraints among college students – Application of a fuzzy approach. International Journal of Organizational Innovation, 8(4), 177–187.

60.

Washburne

Wall

(1980). Black-white ethnic differences in outdoor recreation. USDA Forest Service Research Paper. INT-249. Intermountain Forest and Range Experiment Station.

61.

West

P. C.

(1989). Urban region parks and black minorities: Subculture, marginality, and interracial relations in park use in the detroit metropolitan area. Leisure Sciences: An Interdisciplinary Journal, 11(1), 11–28. https://doi.org/10.1080/01490408909512202

62.

Wickrama

K. A.

Wickrama

Bryant

C. M.

(2006). Community influence on adolescent obesity: Race/ethnicity differences. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 35(4), 647–657.

63.

Wickrama

Merten

M. J.

Wickrama

K. A.

(2012). Early community influence on young adult physical health: Race/ethnicity and gender differences. Advances in Life Course Research, 17(1), 25–33. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.alcr.2012.01.001

64.

Wilson

J. F.

Christensen

K. M.

(2012). The relationship between outdoor recreation and depression among individuals with disabilities. Journal of Leisure Research, 44(4), 486–506. https://doi.org/10.1080/00222216.2012.11950275