Review Reports

Round 1

Reviewer 1 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

Overall, this manuscript addresses an interesting and timely topic and the focus on the lived experiences of older Korean adults engaging in golf as serious leisure is both original and potentially valuable to the literature. The paper has a solid foundation but several areas would benefit from clarification and more rigorous presentation.

• Line 25: The term “successful aging” has been critiqued in recent years for being somewhat narrow and prescriptive. The authors may wish to consider whether “healthy ageing” or another contemporary framework would be more appropriate.
• Lines 42–45: More recent and relevant references would strengthen the argument.
• Lines 88–92: The purpose statement as written is difficult to follow and overly long. Please simplify this sentence to clearly articulate what you examined and how the phenomenological approach illuminated participants’ experiences.
• Lines 97–98: The assertion that “Continued participation in golf activities during retirement years represents successful life planning” needs either justification or nuance.
• Lines 125–126: The references cited here appear outdated. Please integrate more recent scholarship.
• Lines 146–153: This section reads as repetitive, with phrases echoing earlier text almost verbatim.
• Line 162 onwards: The theoretical framework relies almost exclusively on the original formulation of serious leisure. Please consider incorporating subsequent developments or critiques of Stebbins’ serious leisure framework to avoid over-reliance on a single author and to demonstrate engagement with its scholarly evolution.
• Line 258: Please ensure that no results are presented prior to the Results section.
• While the authors justify the choice of a phenomenological approach, the methodological description does not clearly outline how phenomenology guided the study beyond general in-depth interviewing. Please introduce the specific phenomenological tradition you follow and describe the steps taken in data collection and analysis that make the study genuinely phenomenological. This clarification is essential for methodological transparency and to support the validity of the findings.
• Additionally, the observation component has not been sufficiently described. The manuscript notes that participant observation was conducted, yet methodological details and analytical integration of these observations are limited. Please expand on how observation was performed and incorporated into the analysis.
• Lines 285–287: Might individuals with lower levels of enthusiasm still offer meaningful insights? For example, regarding barriers, disengagement or ambivalent experiences? Please clarify the rationale for excluding them.
• Line 291: Given that golf is often associated with socioeconomic privilege, omitting these considerations may affect the sample’s representativeness. Please clarify why these factors were not considered and discuss implications.
• Use of English pseudonyms: A suggestion – the use of Anglophone pseudonyms (e.g., ‘Michael’) feels unnecessary and reinforces Anglocentric norms. Using Korean pseudonyms would better reflect participants’ cultural context.
• Table 2 is introduced too early and is not referenced anywhere in the text.
• Line 354: There is repeated information in this section. Please revise for non-redundancy.
• Given the very small sample, it may be useful to discuss how thematic saturation or sufficiency was evaluated.
• In Discussion, a reflection on how the findings may (or may not) transfer to other forms of serious leisure would broaden the manuscript’s contribution.
• Please include a limitations section. Points to consider include the small sample (n=6), the potentially niche or socioeconomically bounded nature of golf participation, and any constraints inherent to your methodological choices.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

Some sentences need revision as they are unclear and overly long.

Author Response

 

Comment 1: [The term “successful aging” has been critiqued in recent years for being somewhat narrow and prescriptive. The authors may wish to consider whether “healthy ageing” or another contemporary framework would be more appropriate.]

 

Response: [We have changed the terminology based on the revisions.]

[Changes: Line 25; 130; 269; 288; 563; 593; 600; 649; 681; 740; Table 2, in Meaning Units column]

 

 

Comment 2: [Lines 42–45: More recent and relevant references would strengthen the argument.]

 

Response: [We have added additional relevant papers to support the contention that participation in and satisfaction with sports and leisure activities play an important role in improving quality of life and increasing satisfaction.]

[Changes: Line 45-46; References section]

 

 

Comment 3: [Lines 88–92: The purpose statement as written is difficult to follow and overly long. Please simplify this sentence to clearly articulate what you examined and how the phenomenological approach illuminated participants’ experiences.]

 

Response: [We have revised and supplemented sentences to clearly explain how we illuminated the participants’ experiences with the phenomenological approach.]

[Changes: Line 95-103]

 

 

Comment 4: [Lines 97–98: The assertion that “Continued participation in golf activities during retirement years represents successful life planning” needs either justification or nuance.]

 

Response: [Golf participation among seniors is more than just a simple exercise; it's considered a cultural symbol of a fulfilled life. Furthermore, golf participation is considered a sign of economic stability and high social status. Therefore, the revised definition reflects the idea that continuing to play golf after retirement is a symbol of a successful life plan and demonstrates the maintenance of strong social ties.]

[Changes: Line 104-110]

 

 

Comment 5: [Lines 125–126: The references cited here appear outdated. Please integrate more recent scholarship.]

 

Response: [We have added recent research to support the claim that participation in leisure activities, including sports, has a positive impact on the physical and mental health and psychological well-being of older adults.]

[Changes: Line 135-136]

 

 

Comment 6: [Lines 146–153: This section reads as repetitive, with phrases echoing earlier text almost verbatim.]

 

Response: [Based on the revisions, we have confirmed the repeated content and deleted the relevant paragraph.]

[Changes: Line 157]

 

 

Comment 7: [Line 162 onwards: The theoretical framework relies almost exclusively on the original formulation of serious leisure. Please consider incorporating subsequent developments or critiques of Stebbins’ serious leisure framework to avoid over-reliance on a single author and to demonstrate engagement with its scholarly evolution.]

 

Response: [In response to the reviewer's comment regarding the theoretical framework's reliance on Stebbins' original formulation of serious leisure, we have incorporated discussion of subsequent developments and scholarly evolution of the serious leisure perspective. The following content has been added:

"While Stebbins' original formulation (1982, 1992) emphasized the characteristics and qualities of serious leisure engagement, subsequent scholarship has extended this framework in important ways. Research has demonstrated connections between serious leisure and physical and psychological health outcomes, particularly emphasizing health promotion and successful aging among older adults (Siegenthaler and O'Dell 2011; Heo and Lee 2010). Studies have further examined serious leisure's role in achieving well-being, life satisfaction, and quality of life enhancement (Kim, Park, Kim, and Fontes-Comber 2020; Cheng, Stebbins, and Packer 2017; Kim et al. 2014), broadening the framework beyond participation characteristics to outcomes and benefits. Additionally, scholars have explored how serious leisure contributes to identity formation and social capital in later life (Green and Jones 2005; Stenner et al. 2020), expanding understanding of its social and psychological dimensions."

This addition demonstrates engagement with the scholarly evolution of the serious leisure framework and addresses the concern about over-reliance on a single author.]

[Changes: Line 180-191]

 

 

Comment 8: [Line 258: Please ensure that no results are presented prior to the Results section.

While the authors justify the choice of a phenomenological approach, the methodological description does not clearly outline how phenomenology guided the study beyond general in-depth interviewing. Please introduce the specific phenomenological tradition you follow and describe the steps taken in data collection and analysis that make the study genuinely phenomenological. This clarification is essential for methodological transparency and to support the validity of the findings.

Additionally, the observation component has not been sufficiently described. The manuscript notes that participant observation was conducted, yet methodological details and analytical integration of these observations are limited. Please expand on how observation was performed and incorporated into the analysis.]

 

Response: [We appreciate the reviewer's insightful comment regarding the need for greater methodological transparency in our phenomenological approach. In response, we have added the following clarification to specify the hermeneutic phenomenological tradition we followed and the procedures applied in data analysis. This addition clarifies how our study beyond general in-depth interviewing and demonstrates the genuinely phenomenological nature of our research design.

Additional details regarding the third participant observation session have been described. By accompanying the research participant to the same golf practice range or field environment and continuously observing their behavior and interactions at close range without disrupting their golf activity, the behavioral and emotional elements constituting the meaning of the experience were observed.]

[Changes: Line 358-364; 340-347]

 

 

Comment 9: [Lines 285–287: Might individuals with lower levels of enthusiasm still offer meaningful insights? For example, regarding barriers, disengagement or ambivalent experiences? Please clarify the rationale for excluding them.]

 

Response: [Rather than simply participation or career length, the core analysis of this study focuses on the subjective level of engagement in golf and the process of making meaning of the experience. Because golf is often maintained through habit or social inertia, it is difficult to fully capture the essential attributes of serious leisure, such as identity, a sense of accomplishment, and meaning in life, that are formed through golf experiences. These participants' experiences are more likely to be characterized by fatigue, a sense of meaninglessness, or inertial participation, rather than a deeper understanding of the experiential nature of golf itself.

Of course, individuals with low levels of engagement in golf can also provide valuable insights into barriers, disengagement, or ambivalence. However, these experiences are considered more appropriate for analysis in other research areas, such as leisure disengagement, factors that reduce participation, or leisure burnout, than in the research objective of this study. To maintain clarity in the research topic and analytical focus, the primary selection criterion was whether the participants' experiences sufficiently aligned with the research concepts.

Accordingly, this study limited its participants to older adults who demonstrate a sustained interest in and ascribe meaning to golf and who perceive their golf experience as a part of their lives and identity. Therefore, the exclusion of individuals with low levels of enthusiasm for golf from the potential research pool was not due to a lack of importance in their experiences, but rather a deliberate methodological choice to focus the analysis on the types of experiences most aligned with the theoretical framework and objectives of this study. These selection criteria are expected to contribute to ensuring the internal validity of the research results and the consistency of interpretation.]

[Changes: Line 305-307]

 

 

Comment 10: [Line 291: Given that golf is often associated with socioeconomic privilege, omitting these considerations may affect the sample’s representativeness. Please clarify why these factors were not considered and discuss implications.

Use of English pseudonyms: A suggestion – the use of Anglophone pseudonyms (e.g., ‘Michael’) feels unnecessary and reinforces Anglocentric norms. Using Korean pseudonyms would better reflect participants’ cultural context.]

 

Response: [Rather than focusing on the social structural conditions or accessibility of older adults' golf experiences, the goal was to deeply explore how individuals perceive and interpret golf activities and experience them within the context of their lives. Therefore, socioeconomic factors were not included as key analytical variables or participant selection criteria. While socioeconomic resources can serve as a prerequisite for leisure participation from a serious leisure perspective, they are not core concepts that directly explain the essential meaning and experiential structure of leisure experiences. Therefore, rather than focusing on the external conditions that enable golf participation, the analysis focused on the processes of persistence, immersion, identity, and self-actualization that develop after participation.

Furthermore, given the nature of phenomenological qualitative research, which aims to reveal the essence of the phenomenon through the subjective experiences of participants who have most richly experienced it, socioeconomic factors were considered likely to distract from the focus of analysis in this study's experiential and meaning-centered approach.

Finally, I believed that placing socioeconomic status at the forefront risks failing to adequately illuminate the experiential dimensions of golf for the elderly—such as psychological stability, restoration of life rhythms, social bonds, and maintenance of self-identity.

This research design has clear limitations in that it prioritizes the density of experiences and consistency of interpretation that fit the research topic over ensuring statistical representativeness of the sample. However, it is expected to have significance in that it provides an interpretive basis for follow-up research targeting groups with different socioeconomic backgrounds by deeply revealing the essential structure of serious leisure experienced by the elderly within the specific leisure context of golf.

 

Additionally, we modified the use of Korean pseudonyms instead of Anglophone pseudonyms to better reflect the cultural context of the participants.]

[Changes: Line 311-312; Table 1, in Pseudonym column]

 

 

Comment 11: [Table 2 is introduced too early and is not referenced anywhere in the text.]

 

Response: [The position of Table 2 has been adjusted, and it has been additionally referenced in the main text.]

[Changes: Line 424]

 

 

Comment 12: [Line 354: There is repeated information in this section. Please revise for non-redundancy.

Given the very small sample, it may be useful to discuss how thematic saturation or sufficiency was evaluated.]

 

Response: [Based on the requested revisions, we have identified the duplicate content and removed the relevant sentence from the main text.

 

This study ultimately explored the golf experiences of older adults in depth with six research participants. Therefore, we focused on ensuring the adequacy of analysis and the validity of interpretation rather than the quantitative scale of the data. Particularly in qualitative research, we considered that the core criterion for judgment is not the sample size itself determining the quality of the research, but rather how sufficiently the meaningful units and themes necessary to explain the research phenomenon were captured. Ultimately, each participant's interview included repetitive narratives and reflective statements, revealing a pattern where the core meanings of their golf experiences consistently resurfaced within similar thematic categories. This analytical process demonstrated that even with a limited amount of data, the experiential core structure necessary to explain the research topic was sufficiently derived.

Furthermore, the final sampling revealed that participants had experienced golf consistently over a long period of time, and that golf participation was deeply connected to the formation of meaning, identity, and social relationships in later life. Therefore, the sample size of this study, rather than limiting the analysis, served as a condition for in-depth interpretation of each case. While expanding the sample size could broaden the scope of experiences, it also could weaken the analytical depth of the contextual and semantic structure of individual experiences. Therefore, rather than broadening the scope of the themes, the analysis focused on deeply explaining how the identified themes constitute golf as a serious leisure activity for older adults.]

[Changes: Line 389-390]

 

 

Comment 13: [In Discussion, a reflection on how the findings may (or may not) transfer to other forms of serious leisure would broaden the manuscript’s contribution.

Please include a limitations section. Points to consider include the small sample (n=6), the potentially niche or socioeconomically bounded nature of golf participation, and any constraints inherent to your methodological choices.]

 

Response: [Based on the reviewer's valuable feedback regarding the need for greater transparency about the scope and limitations of our study, we have incorporated substantial additional content. This includes two major additions:

First, we have added a comprehensive discussion addressing the transferability of our findings to other forms of serious leisure activities. This section explores how the themes identified in this study—such as freedom and liberation from daily responsibilities, health promotion and resumed activity, social bonding through shared interests, and self-development and identity formation—may or may not be applicable to other types of serious leisure pursuits beyond golf. We acknowledge that while some findings may be transferable to activities such as tennis, hiking, or dance, golf's unique characteristics, including its relatively high socioeconomic barriers, slower physical pace, and emphasis on technical skill development, may differentiate it from other serious leisure forms. We also note that activities with lower financial barriers or different social dynamics might reveal different patterns of engagement and meaning-making among older adults.

Second, we have included a new limitations section that explicitly addresses several key constraints of our study. These limitations include: (1) the small sample size (n=6), which, while appropriate for phenomenological research emphasizing depth over breadth, may limit the generalizability of findings across the broader population of Korean older adults engaged in golf; (2) the potentially niche and socioeconomically constrained nature of golf participation, which requires significant financial investment and may mean our participants predominantly represent middle to upper socioeconomic backgrounds; and (3) methodological constraints inherent to qualitative phenomenological research, including the interpretive nature of the approach, the influence of researchers' perspectives on findings, and potential recall bias in retrospective self-reported experiences. These additions enhance the methodological transparency and scholarly rigor of our manuscript.]

[Changes: Line 698-730]

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

dear authors, thank you for this paper and your research on the great topic of aging, leisure, recreation, and adding to it, serious leisure; i will offer several suggestions for improvement and i want to help you to publish your paper , it needs a few more changes, but again i congratulate you and thank you for this, come to usa and lets do one like this here, ; more recommendations; line 52 you should mention something about golfers who use the cart and are not walking, where i live it is rare to see someone walking; you are using so much of stebbins information, there should be some direct quotes from his information; concerning the literature review, it would be much stronger if you offered some critical theory about the negative dynamics of golf, is it too exclusive, or sexist,; and further in the lit review, you need to include a few criticisms of stebbins; in the methods section; numbers 256-258, you are making a weak case for qual. research, it should be shown in much more positive dynamics, you do not have to contrast your paper to quantitative;  or put this at the end of the methods rather than at the beginning; discuss the richness and dynamics of the interview and the insights; 

Comments on the Quality of English Language

so i made just a few notes, but this entire paper must be reviewed by some ? company or native english speaker who is academic; for example - in line 24, it should be said "the" average life; and in 25, you havew omited another "a" and another "the "; in line 27 the word beings should not be there;p line 30 usually in referencing the first time the authors are listed you list all authors not et al, unless there are more than six; and then number 512 - 515 is too long of a sentance; should be divided; overall there needs to be improvement in english line by line; 

Author Response

Comment 1: [Line 52 you should mention something about golfers who use the cart and are not walking, where i live it is rare to see someone walking]

 

Response: [Thank you for this important observation. We acknowledge that our discussion of golf's physical benefits requires clarification regarding different modes of play. We will revise the manuscript to explicitly address the distinction between cart-riding and walking golfers, as this significantly impacts the exercise benefits of golf participation. Specifically, while golf carts are gaining popularity among the elderly as a means of short-distance transportation, no direct correlation has been found between cart usage and physical health. Furthermore, we explicitly state that walking golf is gaining attention, particularly in recent Korean golf culture, aligning with the trend of simultaneously pursuing health and well-being. We aim to highlight its benefits beyond physical activity, including positive effects on mental focus and performance enhancement, as well as providing greater satisfaction. We believe this revision will appropriately contextualize the research findings to suit various golf practices while maintaining the validity of the serious leisure activity framework analysis.]

[Changes: Line 63-77; References section]

 

 

Comment 2: [you are using so much of stebbins information, there should be some direct quotes from his information]

 

Response: [Thank you for highlighting this methodological concern. You are absolutely correct that our extensive reliance on Stebbins' theoretical framework would be strengthened by incorporating direct quotations from his seminal works. We will revise the literature review to include strategic direct quotes that capture the essence of serious leisure theory and its six distinctive characteristics. Specifically, we will incorporate Stebbins' (1982) foundational definition: "the systematic pursuit of an amateur, hobbyist, or volunteer core activity that is highly substantial, interesting, and fulfilling and where, in the typical case, participants find a career in acquiring and expressing a combination of its special skills, knowledge, and experience." It will not only strengthen our theoretical foundation but also provide readers with immediate access to Stebbins' original conceptualization, enhancing the scholarly rigor of our work while properly crediting his intellectual contributions.]

[Changes: Line 228-232]

 

 

 

 

 

Comment 3: [concerning the literature review, it would be much stronger if you offered some critical theory about the negative dynamics of golf, is it too exclusive, or sexist]

 

Response: [Rather than critically examining the negative dynamics of golf experiences for older adults, such as social structural conditions or accessibility, the goal was to deeply explore how individuals perceive and interpret golf and experience it within the context of their own lives. While these negative perspectives may serve as prerequisites for golf participation from a serious leisure perspective, they are not core concepts that directly explain the essential meaning and experiential structure of leisure experiences. Therefore, the analysis focused on the processes of persistence, immersion, identity, and self-realization that develop after participation, rather than on the external factors that influence participation. Furthermore, highlighting negative perspectives risks misleading the reader by failing to fully understand the experiential dimensions that golf offers older adults, such as psychological stability, rhythmic restoration, social bonding, and self-identity maintenance. By deeply describing the essential structure of serious leisure experiences for older adults within the specific leisure context of golf, this study is expected to be meaningful in that it provides a broader understanding of various social structural conditions, leisure equity, and social justice, and provides an interpretive foundation for future research based on these findings.]

[Changes: Line 127 onwards]

 

 

Comment 4: [and further in the lit review, you need to include a few criticisms of Stebbins]

 

Response: [Thank you for this important theoretical consideration. We will incorporate scholarly critiques of Stebbins' serious leisure theory to provide a more nuanced and critical theoretical foundation. In this study, which specifically targets Korean participants, we will add a perspective highly relevant to the context: the potential Western bias inherent in this theory and its limited applicability in non-Western cultural contexts. By addressing this critical viewpoint, we aim to explain that while acknowledging theoretical limitations, serious leisure theory remains useful for understanding participants' golf experiences within the Korean context.]

[Changes: Line 192-207]

 

 

Comment 5: [in the methods section; numbers 256-258, you are making a weak case for qual. research, it should be shown in much more positive dynamics, you do not have to contrast your paper to quantitative; or put this at the end of the methods rather than at the beginning]

 

Response: [We appreciate this constructive feedback regarding our methodological justification. We will supplement this section to emphasize the positive attributes and distinctive advantages of phenomenological inquiry for understanding lived experiences. Specifically, we will highlight how phenomenological research excels at capturing the rich, nuanced meanings that older adults attribute to their golf experiences, exploring the depth and complexity of their emotional, social, and identity-related transformations that cannot be adequately measured through quantitative instruments. Furthermore, as you have suggested, I would like to reposition this content at the end to once again demonstrate that the phenomenological approach is methodologically sophisticated and appropriate.]

[Changes: Line 365-390]

 

 

 

 

Comment 6: [discuss the richness and dynamics of the interview and the insights]

 

Response: [This is an excellent suggestion that will significantly enhance our methodological transparency and demonstrate the depth of our data collection process. We will describe how interviews evolved into deep, meaningful conversations where participants shared not just surface-level experiences but profound personal transformations, unexpected life revelations, and emotionally charged moments of reflection. By thoroughly reviewing the organized interview content once more, I will write in a way that more fully reflects how participants view and feel about participating in golf as a serious leisure activity.]

[Changes: Line 449-453; 460-463; 470-477; 511-517; 538-544; 589-591; 596-598]

 

 

Comment 7: [Line 24, it should be said "the" average life]

 

Response: [Based on the revisions, we have completed the sentence revisions.]

[Changes: Line 24]

 

 

Comment 8: [in 25, you havew omited another "a" and another "the"]

 

Response: [Based on the revisions, we have completed the sentence revisions.]

[Changes: Line 25]

 

 

Comment 9: [Line 27 the word beings should not be there]

 

Response: [Based on the revisions, we have completed the sentence revisions.]

[Changes: Line 27]

 

 

Comment 10: [Line 30 usually in referencing the first time the authors are listed you list all authors not et al, unless there are more than six]

 

Response: [The reference citation format has been revised according to the revision instructions and incorporated into the main text.]

[Changes: Line 30; 32; 39; 50; 57; 58; 66; 70; 77; 80; 90; 96; 144; 147; 186; 187; 201; 206; 271; 288; 647]

 

 

Comment 11: [Number 512 - 515 is too long of a sentance; should be divided]

 

Response: [Based on the revisions, we have rewritten the text into two sentences to improve readability and incorporated it into the main body.]

[Changes: Line 609-613]

Round 2

Reviewer 2 Report

Comments and Suggestions for Authors

I have read the cover letter, and along with the changes i think it is fine for the journal.  It is ok to publish, and congrats to authors.

Comments on the Quality of English Language

so i made just a few notes, but this entire paper must be reviewed by some ? company or native english speaker who is academic; for example - in line 24, it should be said "the" average life; and in 25, you havew omited another "a" and another "the "; in line 27 the word beings should not be there;p line 30 usually in referencing the first time the authors are listed you list all authors not et al, unless there are more than six; and then number 512 - 515 is too long of a sentance; should be divided; overall there needs to be improvement in english line by line;