Work and Leisure

194 Seppo E. Iso-Ahola and Roger C. Mannellset in motion two opposing forces – a direct negative influence of stress onhealth and a positive influence that results when the stress triggers the operationof leisure-coping resources which in turn positively influence health. Inthis counteractive model, the stressors people encounter in their lives are in asee-saw battle with leisure and other coping resources for our wellbeing. Forexample, the stress of balancing work, family and financial concerns mayhave a negative effect on health, but this stress may also cause people tochange their lifestyles and leisure behaviour to help with psychological andphysical recovery.Coping resources have also been thought to reduce the impact of stress onhealth without directly influencing health itself. One such model is the stressreduction model. The availability of coping resources may reduce the likelihoodthat an event will be perceived as a stressor or as highly stressful. Forexample, if I am a person who has a proactive problem-solving approach tolife and I generally choose leisure to provide challenges, I would be morelikely to experience a change in technology in my workplace, a potentiallystressful event, as a challenge to be relished and surmounted rather than as anunwelcome and negative event.What evidence is there for these different views of the way in whichleisure helps people cope with stress? Some evidence has been found for thebuffering influence of leisure on health. For example, among a group ofpeople experiencing higher levels of stress, those who reported experiencinga high degree of freedom and control in their leisure also reported significantlylower levels of illness compared to those people who perceived lowlevels of freedom (Coleman, 1993). However, Coleman found no evidencefor the buffering influence of leisure-based social support. On the otherhand, Iso-Ahola and Park (1996) found that people who reported that theirleisure participation enhanced their friendship networks and enjoyment ofshared activities were less depressed and had fewer physical illness symptomswhen under stress. Conversely, they found no evidence that leisurebasedbeliefs of self-determination buffered the effects of stress on health.Interestingly, they also found that those study participants with strongersocial support and self-determination beliefs reported fewer illness symptomsregardless of the level of stress present in their lives. These findingssuggest that these leisure beliefs, under some circumstances, not only bufferstress, but have a direct positive effect on health regardless of the level ofstress encountered.In a study in which the daily stress experienced by university students wasassessed, Iwasaki and Mannell (2000a) also found that the belief that leisureprovided a sense of autonomy and fostered friendships positively influencedwell-being and health. Some evidence was found for the buffer effect of theseleisure-coping resources, but there was also evidence that the students’ leisurebeliefs functioned to both counteract and reduce the experience of stress andconsequently ill-health. These latter findings are consistent with those of