Abstract
Recreation may be thought of in terms of the environments as well as the activities man selects in his leisure. The environment may be more closely related to the functions or satisfactions derived from recreation than are activities or form. The compensatory hypothesis should, logically, apply to the individual's selection of environments. A fair test of this hypothesis involves some control over the effects of access or means and knowledge of alternatives. Only by controling for these powerful variables can one hope to isolate the environmental determinants of recreation behavior. A comparison of an urban and a rural population, which are similar in their knowledge of and access to outdoor recreation opportunities, provides some evidence for the validity of the compensatory hypothesis as applied to environments. When compared these groups placed relatively more value on several elements of the outdoor recreation experience which were less evident in their home and work environments.

This publication has 3 references indexed in Scilit: