An Exploration of the Relationships
Among Social Representations, Social
Networks and Residents’ Leisure
Involvement in the Context of
Community Festivals: A Case of the
Lotus Festival in Baihe City, Taiwan
Pei-Wen Huang
Introduction
 In recent years, there has been considerable
interest in the utility of the concept of
involvement for better understanding aspects
of recreation behavior.
 Stokowski (1994) suggested that leisure would
be affected by social networks and social
meanings of leisure activities.
 The purpose of this study is to identify the
relationships among social representations,
social networks, and residents’ leisure
involvement
Festivals
Festivals are not only sound recreational
activities for people, but also may mean
increased prosperity for a local economy
through tourism (Burr, 1997)
According to Burr (1997), there is
considerable evidence supporting the
importance of building and strengthening
relationships within a community in
order to facilitate successful festivals and
special events.
Social Representations
Social representations are not simply
attitudes, opinions, or values, but are
theories about the world that are
involved in the discovery and
organization of social reality
(Moscovici, 1973).
It is suggested that we possess a
hierarchy of social representations
that contain ideas, information, and
concepts concerning particular
locations or events(Hubbard, 1996).
Social Networks
Interactional criteria:the frequency of
communication, the type and content of the
relationship, whether ties are reciprocal, and
the extent to which ties are intense and
durable.
 Structural measures:the size of the network,
network density, clusterability.
 The networks approach reoriented research
efforts to consider how social ties within
communities fostered the grouping behaviors
typically seen at recreation places
(Stokowski,1992).
Leisure Involvement
Leisure involvement refers to how we
think about our leisure and recreation,
and it affects our behavior as well.
Social-psychological involvement is a
state of motivation, arousal, or interest
with regard to a product, an activity, or
an object .
Behavioral involvement was defined as
time and/or intensity of effort expended
in pursuing a particular activity.
Hypotheses
Both categorizations and shared
representations influence the processing
of new information and affect attitudes
and behavior (Moscovici, 1981)
Hypothesis 1: The social representations
will positively affect residents’ leisure
involvement.
Hypotheses
People live in complex social worlds and
maintain simultaneous relationships
with family, friends, neighbors,
colleagues, and others in their personal
and home communities. Some of these
ties are likely to influence leisure
choices or behaviors(Stokowski, 1992).
Hypothesis 2: The social networks will
positively affect resident’s leisure
involvement.
Hypotheses
 Leisure should not be viewed as a separate
sphere, as again, it is all pervasive, touching
many aspects of people’s lives, and would be
affected by the interaction of social factors
such as social networks and social
representations.
 Hypothesis 3: The social networks will
moderate the effect of social representations on
residents’ leisure involvement.
Study Framework
Social networks
Social
representations
Resident’s leisure
involvement
Scope of Research
This research focuses on the study of
community festivals, and examines
the case of the Lotus Festival in Baihe
City, Taiwan.
The Lotus Festival, started in 1995
and sponsored by the Lentan
community development association.
The scope of this research is the
Lentan community with a population
of approximately 1200 people.
Sampling, and Data Gathering
In April and May of 2003, using a doorto-door investigation method, surveys
were handed to 102 local residents met
at the Lentan community area.
Ninety-one surveys were returned of
which 80 were valid for an overall
response rate of 78.4%.
Measuring methods:
Resident’s social-psychological
leisure involvement
The Leisure Involvement Scale is revised
from Kim, Scott, & Cromptom’s (1997)
Social Psychological Involvement Scale.
It contains 6 items and the score is based
on Likert's 5-point measurement.
Resident’s behavioral
involvement
Times that resident has attended
/ Resident’s living years in Baihe
= Density of participation.
Social representations
 The Social Representation Scale is revised
from Ginges and Cairns’s (2000) Social
Representation Scale（It contains three
dimensions—definition, function, and
implementation evaluation）and retouched
by 20 festival experts attended the 2002 IFEA
(International Festivals & Events Association)
Las Vegas Convention and Session. The score
is based on a Likert 5-point measurement.
Social networks
a. The number of close friends and
relatives the resident has.
b. The number of social groups the
resident participated.
Control Variables
Several studies have shown that a
participant’s socio-demographic
characteristics will affect the extent of
leisure involvement (Madrigal, Havitz,
& Howard, 1992; Wiley, 1995).
this study manipulates a participant’s
socio-demographic characteristics as
control variables that include gender,
marital status, age, education, residence,
and income.
Results
 Of the 80 residents sampled, 66.3% were
males and 90% were married. Participants
50 years old or older made up the largest age
cohort at almost 40%. Most of the
participants were junior high school educated
(almost 68.8%). Of the residents sampled,
almost 87.5% had been living in Lentan for
20 years or more. About 62.5% of the
participants’ total household annual incomes
were less than NT$350,000.
Table 1: Factor Analysis for Leisure Involvement Scale (N=80)
Items
Factor1
4. I plan to attend the Lotus Festival in the future
.823
Communali
ty
.677
2. I can say the Lotus Festival interests me a lot
.809
.654
6. I would like to recommend the Lotus Festival to
friends
1. For me, the Lotus Festival is really a pleasure
.777
.604
.768
.590
3. I attach great importance to the Lotus
Festival
5. Attending the Lotus Festival is a bit like giving a
gift to myself
Eigenvalue
.723
.523
.574
.329
3.378
Proportion of variance accounted for
56.294
Alpha
.8375
Items
10
5
4
13
12
11
27
22
23
24
19
20
18
26
3
25
1
21
17
2
Alpha
Cumulative proportion of variance accounted
for
Factor
.852
1
.812
.762
.750
.734
.721
.663
.516
-.138
-.168
Factor
2
-.106
.103
-.184
.862
.841
.834
.831
.757
.319
.405
.170
.126
.247
.8951
Factor
3
.282
.240
.305
.259
.465
-.172
.114
.179
.225
-.184
-.140
-.210
-.241
.760
.704
.691
.560
-.134
-.326
.8914
.165
.218
.7256
65.203
Factor
.110
4
.190
.222
.280
.177
.807
.767
.676
.7462
Baseline
Model 1
Variables
Model 2-1
Model 2-2
Model 3-1
Model 3-2
Group
Friend
Group
Friend
※
※
※
※
※
※
21.181***
-.237
-.311
-.348
-19.137
-3.678
Community identity (F1)
.264*
.267*
.266*
.385
.071
Implementation evaluation
(F2)
-.041
-.040
-.036
.423
.063
.610**
.612**
.611**
1.135**
1.071**
.225
.222
.217
.352
.308
.048
.007
5.789
.139
F1*G; F1*F
-.125
.008
F2*G; F2*F
-.380
-.005
F3*G; F3*F
-.402*
-.022
F4*G; F4*F
-.100
.002
Control Variables
Constant
Leisure & socializing (F3)
Economic benefit (F4)
Social network
R2
.079
R2 Change
F
F Change
1.038
.462
.463
.463
.502
.489
.383
.001
.001
.039
.027
5.917***
5.325***
5.321***
4.295***
4.089***
12.275***
.137
.116
1.249
.840
Baselin
e
Model
1
Model
2-1
Group
Model
2-2
Friend
Model
3-1
Group
Model
3-2
Friend
※
※
※
※
※
※
.489*
-.360
-.385
-.439
-.261
-1.272*
Community identity (F1)
.001
.002
.002
-.019
.008
Implementation evaluation (F2)
-.017
-.016
-.013
-.007
-.005
Leisure & socializing (F3)
.038*
.038*
.038*
.075*
.060
Economic benefit (F4)
.023
.022
.017
.011
.031
.016
.005*
-.090
.058*
F1*G; F1*F
.013
-.001
F2*G; F2*F
-.009
-.001
F3*G; F3*F
-.018
-.001
F4*G; F4*F
.006
-.001
Variables
Control Variables
Constant
Social network
R2
.139
R2 Change
F
F Change
1.962
.304
.319
.362
.367
.401
.165
.015
.058
.048
.038
3.013**
2.897**
3.508**
2.474**
2.850**
4.091**
1.515
6.193*
1.210
1.026
Conclusions
 The social representations and social
networks will positively affect resident’s
leisure involvement. The social networks will
moderate the effect of social representations
on residents’ leisure involvement.
 The close friends and relatives variable was
better than the social groups in predicting the
resident’s leisure involvement was similar
with Eckstein’s (1983) research.
The number of social groups moderated
the effect of the leisure & socializing
factor on the social- psychological
involvement. This finding is inspiring
for future studies.
The festival organizing committee may
be able to determine what to do to
enforce the factors of social
representations or social networks to
facilitate residents’ involvement.
 New research could address other festivals
prior to reaching a theoretical adaptability
for the social representations and the social
networks theories in the community festival
context.
 Other researchers may use different
indicators of social networks, such as
network density and relational distance, to
identify the effect of social networks on the
residents’ leisure involvement.