An investigation of the relationship among skiers and snowboarders ski center preference, flow state and sensation seeking level

The aim of this research is to determine the relationship between skiers' and snowboarders' ski center preference, their flow state and sensation seeking behaviours. In order to collect data in the study, participants were given a personal information form, "The Contextual Sensation Seeking Questionnaire for Skiing and Snowboarding (CSSQ-S)", the "Ski Center Preference Scale (SCPS)", and the The "Dispositional Flow State Scale (SDFS-2)". The data were analyzed in 3 stages with 5 different sample groups. In the first phase, 2 male and 10 female ski and snowboard trainers with ages ranging from 23 to 63 were interviewed in two groups as the focus group for the development of the "Ski Center Preference Scale (SCPS)". In the second phase, information was gathered from 38 participants in order obtain the linguistic equivalence of the study, which was conducted to adapt "The Contextual Sensation Seeking Questionnaire for Skiing and Snowboarding (CSSQ-S)" to Turkish context; and from 53 participants for Test-Retest Reliability. The construct validity, internal consistency (Cronbach Alpha) and Split-Half reliability studies were performed on 622 participants (167 female, X = 24.33, SD = 5.72 years; 455 male, X = 27.52 SD = 7.83 years). In the third phase, analyses were performed in testing hypothesis related to the study with 510 outdoor recreation participants (126 female, X = 23.94, SD = 5.79 years; 384 male, X = 27.33, SD = 7.87 years) who were interested in skiing and snowboarding. Linguistic equivalence study for the adaptation of "The Contextual Sensation Seeking Questionnaire for Skiing and Snowboarding" to Turkish context was carried out primarily. The results of the anaylses revealed that the correlation coefficients of the scale for each item ranged from .46 to .85, and the correlation coefficient was 0.83 (p <.01). KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) value was found 0.88 and Barlett Sphericity values were 2789.44 (p <.001, sd = 45), both of which were performed to analyse the factor structure of the CSSQ-S. When the results of the Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA) were evaluated, it was found that the factor load values of the items varied between ".58 and .81", and the items had high factor load values. The variance explained by the items was 44% for factor 1, and 19% for factor 2, while the total variance for the items was 64%. It was concluded that after the necessary modification procedures, the model reached perfect and sufficient fit indexes; and the factor load values of the items ranged between .55 and .86. In this respect, factor 1 was called "novelty seeking" and factor 2 was called "risk seeking "; and it was concluded that it could be used for Turkish context. After the Confirmatory Factor Analysis (CFA), the internal consistency coefficient obtained from 622 ski and snowboard participants was calculated as .86 for the "novelty seeking" subscale and .77 for the "risk seeking" subscale. According to the results of test-retest reliability, the correlation coefficient for the "novelty seeking" subscale was 0.98 (p <.01); and the correlation coefficient for the "risk seeking" subscale was found .98 (p <.01). KMO (Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin) value was 0.95 and Barlett test value was 7928.86 (p <.001, SD = 253), both of which were performed to analyse the factor structure of the "Ski Center Preference Scale (SCPS)". According to the results of Exploratory Factor Analysis (EFA), it was observed that SCPS occurred in 4-factor structure. Factor load values of the items ranged between .34 and.84, while the variance explained by the items was 44% for factor 1, 6.5% for factor 2, 5.2% for factor 3, and 4.7% for factor 4; total variance of the items was determined as 61%. After necessary modification procedures, it was seen that the model reached excellent and adequate fit indexes, and the factor load values of the items changed between .34 and .83. Factor 1 was named as "accommodation and transport", factor 2 was named as "alternative activities", factor 3 was named as "support services", and factor 4 was named as "nature and environment". The Cronbach Alpha internal consistency reliability coefficient obtained from 622 participants after the CFA analysis was calculated as .89 for accommodation and transportation subscale, .78 for the alternative activities subscale, .88 for the support services subscale and .71 for the nature and environment subscale. When the split-half correlations of the scale were calculated, first half values were .94 for Spearman-Brown formula, and .94 for Guttman Split-Half correlation; on the other hand, the second half values were .95 for Spearman-Brown and .94 for Guttman Split-Half correlation. After the scale adaptation and development processes are completed the data set conformed to the normal distribution according to the results of the Normal Distribution Compatibility Test, which was obtained from three different scales. Correlation analysis results showed that there was a statistically significant relationship between the ski center preference and the flow state (r = .249, p<0.01); between the preference of the ski center and sensation seeking level (r = .196, p<0.01); and between sensation seeking and flow state (r = .549 p<0.01). Structural equation model analysis was performed in order to determine the model constucted in the study. According to the results of the analysis, it was concluded that there was a causal relationship between the ski center preference and the flow state (β = .187, p <01) and p value was statistically significant (p <.01). In Model 2, it was concluded that there was a causal relationship between the preference of the ski center and sensation seeking level (β = .932, p <.01) and the p value was statistically significant (p <.01). In Model 3, it was concluded that there was a causal relationship between sensation seeking level and flow state (β = .581, p <.01) and p value was statistically significant (p <.01). In Model 4, the means of sensation seeking was considered as a variable. Initially, there was an effect between the ski center preference and the flow state in Model 1; however, when the means of sensation seeking is included in sensation seeking model as a variable, the effect of the ski center preference and the flow state was eliminated, p value was insignificant (p<.05), and the mutual effect of ski center preference, sensation seeking, and flow state increased with a significant p value (β = .722, p<.01). Keywords: Recreation, Ski, Snowboard, Sensation Seeking, Flow State, Ski Center Preference