In a foundational paper on subjective wellbeing, Diener (1984) describes subjective wellbeing as both the experience of pleasure (positive affect) and judgements about how good or bad one’s life is (life satisfaction). Framed another way, positive and negative affect can be considered aspects of experienced wellbeing and life satisfaction considered as evaluative well-being. Subjective wellbeing has been taken up in numerous efforts to assess national and global wellbeing (Diener, 2000; Kahneman et al., 2004; Helliwell et al., 2022). Interestingly, in a subjective wellbeing measure designed for such population-based assessment, leisure activities are rated among the most affectively rewarding in daily experience reports (e.g., intimate relations, socializing after work, dining; Kahneman et al., 2004) with paid work and commuting rated very low in terms of affective reward. But is there more to wellbeing than happiness and life satisfaction? Ryff (1989) has argued that eudaimonic concepts add to our understanding of wellbeing. Eudaimonic aspects of well-being are in keeping with historic Western philosophical traditions and are reflected in more modern notions of self-actualization (Ryff, 1989). Eudaimonic wellbeing may also stem from life experiences that involve considerable distress and effort such as Frankl and Lasch (1992) will to meaning, the notion that growth occurs in conditions of suffering and self-fulfillment needs as outlined by Maslow (1943). Research comparing various aspects of life qualities with ratings of both subjective and psychological wellbeing show compelling similarities and differences in these two approaches to wellbeing. For example, the more people rate life as easy with basic wants and needs met, the happier they are, but these ratings appear to have no bearing on perceptions of the meaningfulness of life (Baumeister et al., 2013). In the same study, spending more time with loved ones and rating relationships as more important than achievements were linked to greater meaningfulness of life, but nevertheless, both happiness and meaningfulness were positively associated with feeling connected to others. Thus, considering subjective and psychological wellbeing together captures a broader spectrum of the human experience and wellbeing than either does alone.

One potential critique of conceptualizations of both subjective and psychological wellbeing is the over-emphasis on the individual perspective; that is, both are assessments focused on the one’s own experiences and wellbeing that may miss the broader social context. For example, social integration is a crucial aspect of wellbeing with substantial psychological and physical health consequences (Durkheim, 1963; Cohen and Wills, 1985; Baumeister and Leary, 1995). To address this shortcoming, Keyes (1998) developed a multi-faceted measure of social wellbeing to reflect not only the personal but also the social nature of life. The key components of social wellbeing include a sense of belongingness to a community, a sense of making valued contributions to society, and a belief that one’s social world is comprehensible (Keyes, 1998). Keyes then built on the notion that wellbeing includes both personal and social functioning and proposed that taking all three aspects of wellbeing into consideration (i.e., subjective wellbeing, psychological wellbeing, and social wellbeing) helps to identify a continuum of mental health that ranges from languishing to flourishing (Keyes, 2002).

This concept of flourishing was originally developed to operationalize mental health in a way that answers the call that wellbeing is not simply the absence of mental illness (e.g., Jahoda, 1958), but rather, consists of the presence of positive emotional states, eudaimonic wellbeing, and social connection and contribution (Keyes, 2002). Drawing on population-based data with over three thousand adults, Keyes assessed the implications of this model of mental health for mental illness (i.e., depression) and functioning (i.e., activity limitation and sick days; Keyes, 2002). This mental health model consisted of two scales of subjective wellbeing (affect and life satisfaction), six scales of eudaimonic wellbeing (Ryff, 1989), and five scales of social wellbeing (i.e., social acceptance, social actualization, social contribution, social coherence, and social integration; Keyes 1998). Responses to items on each scale were averaged then standardized and tertiles were constructed for each scale. Participants with scores in the lower tertile for one of the two subjective wellbeing scales and six of the eleven eudaimonic and social wellbeing scales were classified as languishing (approximately 17% of the sample). Conversely, participants with scores in the upper tertile for one of the two subjective wellbeing scales and six of the eleven eudaimonic and social wellbeing scales were classified as flourishing (approximately 18% of the sample). The remainder were classified as moderately healthy (approximately 65% of the sample). This typology of mental health comparing languishing, moderately healthy and flourishing showed striking implications for mental illness and functioning. For example, 14% of participants reported a major depressive episode in the past year, but the representation across categories varied widely from almost 28% of those in the languishing group reporting a major depressive episode, 13% in the moderately healthy group, to less than 5% in the flourishing group with a major depressive episode. Similarly reports of any activity limitation was graded from a high of 64% among the languishing group to 42% among the flourishing group and over two sick days per month in the languishing group to none in the flourishing group. This preliminary research on a mental health typology of languishing to flourishing helped to establish its implications for mental illness and functioning.

Additional work has shown the consequences of this mental health typology for mortality. To be specific, in a ten-year follow-up with the same population-based sample in the research described immediately above, less than 1% of those in the flourishing category passed away, compared to over 5% in the languishing category (Keyes and Simoes, 2012). Further, in analyses that controlled for other factors linked to mortality including age, gender, education, race, cardiovascular disease, and smoking, languishing (vs. flourishing) was a statistically significant predictor of mortality. Thus, this flourishing framework represents not only a more thorough assessment of wellbeing than the well-established subjective and psychological wellbeing measures, but has been shown to have substantial implications for mental and physical health.

Given these links between flourishing and multiple aspects of wellbeing, how does it relate to leisure? Although much is known about the ways in which leisure relates to wellbeing (e.g., Mannell, 2007), less research has been done to study intersections with flourishing. Leisure is related to well-being in multiple ways through both main effect pathways (i.e., wellbeing as an outcome of leisure participation), but also indirectly including the role of leisure as a protective factor when coping with stress (Iwasaki, 2007; Mannell, 2007). In a review paper, Hutchinson and Kleiber (2005) outline numerous ways that casual leisure (i.e., low-effort, easily enjoyable forms of leisure; Stebbins, 1982, 1997) enhances wellbeing. For example, casual leisure activities have been found to have self-protection properties (e.g., buffer against immediately stressful experiences), the social nature of many casual leisure activities helps to enhance a sense of social connection, and casual leisure may provide a context for reflection and personal growth experiences (Hutchinson and Kleiber, 2005). Although much of the research Hutchinson and Kleiber drew on to illustrate links between leisure and various aspects of wellbeing was cross-sectional, experimental and longitudinal research help to show causal associations of leisure participation and wellbeing. In a meta-analysis investigating the impact of leisure participation on subjective wellbeing, both experimental studies (e.g., leisure interventions) and longitudinal research with diverse forms of leisure show positive effects on life satisfaction (Kuykendall et al., 2015).

However, which forms of leisure are most consistently associated with wellbeing? To help answer that, a recent longitudinal study that drew on data from multiple time points over a nine-year period with over 12,000 participants in a European sample showed that physically active leisure, socializing, engaging in cultural activities (e.g., attendance at theatre or musical performance), reading and taking holidays predicted greater happiness and life satisfaction (Kuper et al., 2022). However, the same study showed that not all leisure activities were as beneficial. For example, social media use and watching TV did not predict happiness or life satisfaction and were sometimes negatively related to wellbeing. Further, online gaming was negatively related to happiness and a significant predictor of decreased life satisfaction. In sum, previous research shows that some, though not all, forms of leisure have the potential to enhance wellbeing, although little work has been done to examine the ways leisure may be related to flourishing.

Although much research has investigated the various ways leisure relates to wellbeing, little to no work has been done to examine the ways leisure may be linked to the more comprehensive flourishing/languishing typology. Flourishing reflects both the personal and social aspects of wellbeing (Keyes, 2002) and is associated with multiple aspects of mental health, physical health, functioning, and even mortality (Keyes, 2002; Keyes and Simoes, 2012), making it an important typology of wellbeing to investigate in the context of leisure. Drawing on data drawn from a large community-based survey, we examine the ways multiple forms of leisure are associated with languishing, being moderately healthy and flourishing, with an index constructed from measures of subjective, eudaimonic, and social wellbeing. Recent research on leisure and wellbeing (Kuper et al., 2022) suggests certain forms of leisure (e.g., exercise, socializing, cultural activities) may be more likely to be positively linked to wellbeing than others (e.g., computer gaming, TV watching) and this will be investigated.

Age was self-reported in years. Response options for gender included male, female, and if the participant preferred, a self-identified gender. Marital status options included single (never married), married, common law, separated, divorced, and widowed, which were recoded into two categories: married/common law (1) and all other options (0). Education was assessed with six categories ranging from elementary school completion to graduate degree and was recoded as either having completed college/university (1) and all other lower levels (0). Total household income per year was rated in ten categories beginning with approximately $10,000 intervals for the first five options then $20,000 intervals for the remaining intervals up to 10 ($150,000 or greater).

Six categories were created to capture levels of participation in different forms of leisure activities. Participation in social leisure activities was measured by calculating the combined average of monthly frequency of participation in the following activities: socializing with friends, going out to movies, going out to clubs or bars, and going so spectator sports events. Participation in cultural leisure activities was measured using the average annual frequency of attendance at or visitation to: musical concerts, art galleries/museums, festivals, attending ballet, or dance performances, and live theatre. Participation in home-based leisure activities was measured by calculating the average of weekly frequency of engagement in the following activities: reading for pleasure (e.g., books, newspapers, and/or magazines), playing board or card games, doing puzzles (e.g., crosswords, Sudoku, and jigsaw), and hobbies (e.g., knitting, crafts, and woodworking). A measure of exercise was based on the mean monthly frequency of participation in both vigorous exercise and light exercise. Finally, participation in computer games was represented by typical hours per day spent playing computer games and television watching was represented by typical hours per day spent watching TV.

The flourishing typology was constructed from three single item measures. Subjective wellbeing was assessed with a 10-point life satisfaction scale modeled on a recommendation of the OECD (2013) (i.e., “How satisfied are you with your life in general?” rated from 1 = very dissatisfied to 10 = very satisfied). Psychological wellbeing assessed with meaningfulness or life significance using a 10-point scale also recommended by the OECD (i.e., “Overall, to what extent do you feel things you do in your life are worthwhile?” rated from 1 = not at all to 10 = completely). The notion that a worthwhile life is a reflection of psychological or eudaimonic wellbeing is supported by research by King and colleagues (King et al., 2016) that shows significance (i.e., a worthwhile life) is a key component of meaning. Finally, social wellbeing was assessed using a 7-point scale measuring sense of belonging (i.e., “Sense of belonging to community” rated from 1 = very weak to 7 = very strong). Each wellbeing measure was then re-coded into tertiles (bottom third, mid third, and top third approximately). Finally, participants with at least two of lowest tertiles for any of the wellbeing measures were assigned to the languishing category, participants with at least two mid-tertile scores for any of the wellbeing measures were assigned to the moderate mental health category, and participants with at least two top-tertiles for any of the wellbeing measures were assigned to the flourishing category. The approach we use is an approximation to Keyes (2002) approach but not exactly the same. Keyes’s measure of flourishing was assessed with several scales and while we use it as a model for our own measure, the typology for the present analyses is drawn from three single item measures.

Analyses began with the calculation of descriptive statistics (e.g., means, standard deviations, frequencies) for all study variables. Next, to assess the association of the flourishing/languishing typology with participation in diverse forms of leisure, analyses of variance were conducted to compare means for participation rates for the various leisure activities by flourishing category. Finally, two separate logistic regression analyses were conducted to assess the association of leisure participation first with the languishing category (vs. moderate mental health and flourishing) and then with the flourishing category (vs. moderate mental health and languishing). For both sets of analyses, Model 1 included demographic characteristics as control variables and in Model 2, all leisure participation variables were added to assess their relative contributions.

ANOVA results with each of the leisure participation variables by the flourishing typology were statistically significant (i.e., social activities F (2,4,940) = 40.28, p < 0.001; cultural activities F (2,4,933) = 74.58, p < 0.001; home leisure F (2,4,938) = 27.07, p < 0.001; exercise F (2,4,902) = 27.53, p < 0.001; computer games F (2,4,858) = 3.50, p < 0.05; and television watching F (2,4,603) = 20.71, p < 0.001). Mean participation scores in each category of leisure activity by flourishing typology are shown in Table 2 and post-hoc comparisons are noted with superscripts. The general pattern shows that in the flourishing group, means for social, cultural, home, and exercise forms of leisure tend to be higher than the moderately mentally health and significantly higher that the languishing groups. Conversely, means in the languishing group for playing computer games and watching television are significantly higher than mean ratings for these activities in the flourishing group.

For the analysis of languishing (compared to moderate mental health and flourishing), the older participants were, being married or cohabiting, and having greater income were all associated with lower likelihood of languishing (see Table 3, Model 1). With the addition of the leisure activities, social, cultural, and exercise forms of leisure were also associated with lower likelihood of languishing. However, greater television watching was associated with a higher likelihood of languishing (see Table 3, Model 2).

Somewhat the inverse was found for logistic regression analyses with flourishing (compared to moderate mental health and languishing). The older participants were, being female (vs. male), being married, and having a higher level of income were all associated with a greater likelihood of flourishing (see Table 4, Model 1). Again, social leisure, cultural leisure, and exercise were associated with a greater likelihood of flourishing and television watching was associated with a lower likelihood of flourishing (see Table 4, Model 2).