曾有學者表示未來人們不受工作束縛、可自由參與休閒，但是依照目前的經濟制度與全球化模式，工作者常常主動或被動延長工時，剩餘時間能從事的休閒活動有限；工作者是否享受休閒時的樂趣值得再深入探討。因此本研究欲了解個人工作的類型與限制如何影響非工作時間的休閒參與，以及休閒時的樂趣感受，並試圖驗證解釋工作對休閒影響的兩個假設：後遺假設(spillover hypothesis)或補償假設(compensation hypothesis)在台灣的適用性。本文利用2007年「台灣地區社會變遷基本調查」當中的五期三次「休閒與生活組」資料進行大規模的分析。研究對象設定為25至55歲非農民的工作者，樣本數為986人次。本研究只討論了四種休閒活動：看電視、看書、與朋友聚會、參與體能活動。
研究結果發現，工作的重要性並未降低，工作中的不同面向影響休閒的選擇、行為和樂趣程度。工時、收入對各項活動的參與機會有不同的影響；高階白領與低階白領的休閒參與比其他工作者豐富，藍領工作者次之，服務工作者參與休閒活動的機會相對較少。工作者在勞動市場之位置與資源不同會影響參與休閒的機會，高階白領參與活動時比較不受收入的限制。個人的職業類別並未完全左右個人休閒時的行為，各個職業工作者休閒活動的參與頻率沒有明顯差異；不過工作仍會影響個人休閒時的感受，高階白領與服務工作者藉由休閒獲得工作上缺乏的感受、增添生活的多樣性。因此本研究支持補償假設，後遺假設不成立。

A researcher says that it is a leisure society in the future, by then everyone should be free to leisure. However, the effects of economic system and globalization make workers increase working hours voluntarily or involuntarily. They don’t have a range of wide choice of leisure or participate in leisure in their free time. It is also necessary to understand whether the workers’ leisure enjoyment is affected by their work. This paper discusses how workers’ working type and working constraints affect personal leisure participation in non-work time and the enjoyment in leisure activities. The effects of work on leisure and the relationship between them can be interpreted by two hypotheses, spillover hypothesis and compensatory hypothesis. Many researches support spillover hypothesis or compensatory hypothesis but tests of the hypotheses are rare in Taiwan. The data is nation-wide sampling survey in 2007; it came from Leisure Time, phase 5, wave 3, Taiwan Social Change Survey. The objects of the paper are all workers besides farmers between 25 and 55. The sample is 986 people. Owing to the limit of secondary data, it discusses four leisure activities: watching TV, reading books, getting together with friends and physical activities.
The empirical results points out that work would affect leisure and it’s not a leisure society now. The workers’ chance of leisure participation is unequal. The upper white-collar and lower white-collar workers participate in activities more often than others. Comparing to the blue-collar workers, the service workers don’t have more opportunities to participate in leisure activities. The effects of income and working hour on four leisure activities are different. All workers have different resources and economic safety so their chance of leisure is different. The effects of income on leisure participation are least for upper white-collar workers. According to the results of frequency and enjoyment, workers’ occupation doesn’t shape leisure behavior and enjoyment. Workers don’t participate in these activities which are similar or opposite to their occupation more often. Nevertheless, upper white-collar and service workers tend to have more enjoyment from these activities which are opposite to their occupation. The result supports compensatory hypothesis but spillover hypothesis is not confirmed by the research.

謝辭.......................................................I
中文摘要..................................................II
英文摘要..................................................IV
目錄......................................................VI
圖目錄..................................................VIII
表目錄....................................................IX
第壹章 緒論...............................................1
第一節 研究緣起...........................................1
第二節 研究重要性與研究目的...............................3
第貳章 理論與文獻探討.....................................4
第一節 休閒社會與風險社會.................................4
第二節 工作與休閒的關係...................................9
第三節 休閒參與和休閒樂趣................................13
第參章 研究設計..........................................16
第一節 研究架構及研究假設................................16
第二節 資料來源..........................................19
第三節 變項說明與操作…..................................21
第四節 分析方法..........................................26
第肆章 資料分析..........................................28
第一節 變項的交叉分析及檢定..............................28
第二節 工作者的休閒安排..................................36
第三節 參與者的參與頻率和休閒樂趣........................44
第伍章 結論與建議........................................53
第一節 結果與討論........................................53
第二節 建議.............................................56
參考文獻..................................................57
附錄......................................................64
附錄1 問卷中13項休閒活動................................64

參考文獻
中文部分
Bammel, Gene and Lei Lane Burrus-Bammel著、涂淑芳譯(1995)休閒與人類行為。台北：桂冠。
Beck著、汪浩譯(2003)風險社會—通往另一個現代的路上。台北：巨流。
Beck, Ulrich and Johannes Willms著、路國林譯(2004)勞動領域的風險制度。自由與資本主義。台北：先覺。
Sennett, Richard著、黃維玲譯(1999)職場啟示錄。台北：時報。
Stephen Edgell著、郭寶蓮、袁千雯譯(2009)有償工作與異化。工作社會學導論讀，頁36-45。台北：韋伯文化。
Veblen, Thorstein著、李華夏譯(2007)炫燿式的休閒。有閒階級論。台北：左岸文化。
台灣社會變遷調查(2010)計劃簡介。
http://www.ios.sinica.edu.tw/sc/cht/home.php
行政院主計處(1992)人力運用調查報告。台北：行政院主計處
──(1997)人力運用調查報告。台北：行政院主計處
──(2001)社會發展趨勢調查報告─休閒生活與時間運用。台北：行政院主計處
──(2002)人力運用調查報告。台北：行政院主計處
──(2004)台灣地區時間運用調查報告。台北：行政院主計處
──(2007a)人力運用調查報告。台北：行政院主計處
──(2007b) 96年受僱員工動向調查報告統計表。台北：行政院主計處
──(2006)台灣地區婦女婚育與就業調查報告。台北：行政院主計處
江豐富(2006)外勞引進對本國勞工失業、職業選擇及薪資之影響。台灣經濟預測與政策 37: 69-111。
李碧涵(2001)知識經濟時代國家競爭力的社會經濟分析。國家發展研究 1: 27-61。
李誠、辛炳隆、成之約(2000)勞動市場彈性化與非典型僱用。行政院勞工委員會委託研究(計劃編號: CLA89-08)。台北：行政院勞工委員會。
李誠(2000)知識經濟時代的勞工政策。見高希均、李誠編，知識經濟之路，頁267-291。台北：天下文化。
文崇一(1990)台灣居民的休閒生活。台北：東大圖書。
吳忠吉(2001)產業與人力結構雙雙失衡。見李誠編，誰偷了我們的工作，頁75-95。台北：天下遠見。
周桂田(1998)現代性與風險社會。台灣社會學刊 21: 89-129。
侯錦雄(1999)休閒生活態度與鄰里公園使用行為之不同層級城市比較─以臺北、臺中、彰化市居民為例。戶外遊憩研究 12(2): 55-69。
陳淑芳、李誠(2006)台灣就業人口的工時與對工時的偏好。企業人力資源管理實務專題研究成果發表會論文。桃園：中央大學。
陳彰儀(1989)工作與休閒—從工業心理學的觀點探討休閒的現況與理論。台北：淑馨。
陳鴻雁、謝邦昌(2003)我國國民運動意識之調查研究。行政院體育委員會委託研究報告(編號：Ncpfs-All-091-002)。台北：行政院體育委員會。
張宗昌、余智生(2008)走路運動之休閒效益探討。嶺東體育暨休閒學刊 6: 137-148。
張苙雲、廖培珊(2008)第五期第三次調查計畫執行報告。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。
傅仰止(2009)獨樂樂不如眾樂樂?休閒的社會性與休閒滿意。台灣社會學刊 42： 55-94。
溫啟邦、衛沛文、詹惠婷、詹益辰、江博煌、鄭丁元(2007)從分析運動熱量談當前台灣全民運動政策－比較台灣與美國民眾的運動習慣、強度與頻率。台灣衛誌，26(5): 386-399。
蔡宏進(2004a)休閒與工作的關係。休閒社會學。台北：三民書局。
──(2004b)休閒與個人的生命週期。休閒社會學。台北：三民書局。
──(2004c)休閒與家庭。休閒社會學。台北：三民書局。
劉慧俐、藍忠孚、藍采鳳(1995)女醫師專業生涯、婚姻與家庭之研究。中華衛誌，14(6): 461-469。
葉智魁(1995)工作與休閒—提升生活素質的反省。戶外遊憩研究 8(2) : 31-46。
葉秀珍、王德睦(2008)台灣非典型就業的發展趨勢以及決定因素之分析。台灣的社會變遷1985~2005：台灣會變遷調查計劃第十一次研討會論文。台北：中央研究院社會學研究所。
劉維公(2001)第二現代理論：介紹貝克與季登斯的現代性分析。見顧忠華編，第二現代—風險社會的出入？，頁1-16。台北：巨流。
顧忠華(2001)風險、社會與倫理。見顧忠華編，第二現代—風險社會的出入?，頁17-46。台北：巨流。
英文部分
Allison, Paul D. (1999) Logistic Regression Using the SAS System: Theory and Application. Cary, NC: Sas Institute Inc..
Beck, Ulrich (2000) The Brazilianization of the West. Pp. 1-9 in Brave New World of Work, edited by Ulrich Beck. USA: Blackwell Publishers Inc..
Blekesaune, Morten (2005) Working Conditions and Time Use. Acta Sociologica 48: 308-320.
Burch, William R. (1969) The Social Circles of Leisure. Journal of Leisure Research 1(2): 125-147.
Cerni, Paula (2005) Book Review: The Brave New World of Work. Review of Radical Political Economics 37(3): 390-395.
Chen, Su-Yen (2009) Functions of Reading and Adults’ Reading Interests. Reading Improvement 46(2): 108-116.
Clark, Nicola (1986) Central Life Interests of Australian Workers. Work and Occupations 13(1): 67-75.。
Clarkberg, Marin and Phyllis Moen (2001) Understanding the time-squeeze: Married Couples’ Preferred and Actual Work-Hour Strategies. American Behavioral Scientist 44(7): 1115-1135.
Critcher, Chas and Peter Bramham (2004) The Devil Still Makes Work. Pp. 34-50 in Work and Leisure, edited by Haworth, John T. and Anthony J. Veal. Routlede: New York.
Dumazedier, Joffre ,translated from the French by Stewart E. McClure (1967a) The Chips are Not Down. Pp. 3-32 in Toward a society of leisure, edited by Joffre Dumazedier. New York : The Free Press.
— (1967b) What Made Leisure Possible? What Will Leisure Be? Pp. 33-44 in Toward a society of leisure, edited by Joffre Dumazedier. New York : The Free Press.
Echtelt, Patricia E. van, Arie C. Glebbeek and Siegwart M. Lindenberg (2006) The New Lumpiness of Work: Explaining the Mismatch between Actual and Preferred Working Hours. Work, Employment and Society 20(3): 493-512.
Glover, Troy D. and John L. Hemingway (2005) Locating Leisure in the Social Capital Literature. Journal of Leisure Research 37(4): 387-401
Greenhalgh , Leonard and Zehava Rosenblatt (1984) Job Insecurity: Toward Conceptual Clarity. Academy of Management Review 9(3): 438-448.
Godbey, Geoffrey (1999) Leisure, Recreation, Play, and Flow. Pp2-14 in Leisure in Your Life, edited by Geoffrey Godbey. Pennsylvania: Venture Publish.
Gratton, Chris and Peter Taylor (2004) The Economics of Work and Leisure. Pp. 85- 106 in Work and Leisure, edited by Haworth, John T. and Anthony J. Veal. Routlede: New York.
Hagedorn, Robert and Sanford Labovitz (1968) Participation in Community Associations by Occupation: A Test of Three Theories. American Sociological Review 33(2): 272-183.
Haworth, John and Suzan Lews (2005) Work, Leisure and Well-Being. British Journal of Guidance & Counseling 33(1): 67-79.
Haworth, John T. (2004) Work, Leisure and Well-being. Pp. 168-183 in Work and Leisure, edited by Haworth, John T. and Anthony J. Veal. Routlede: New York.
Iso-Ahola, Seppo E. and Roger C. Mannell (2004) Leisure and Health. Pp. 168-183 in Work and Leisure, edited by Haworth, John T. and Anthony J. Veal. Routlede: New York.
Jacobs, Jerry A. and Kathleen Gerson (1998) Who Are the Overworked Americans? Review of Social Economy 56(4): 442-459.
Jacobs, Jerry A. and Kathleen Gerson (2002) Overworked Individuals or Overworked Families? Explaining Trends in Work, Leisure and Family Time. Work and Occupations 28(1): 40-63.
Kabanoff, Boris (1980) Work and Nonwork: A Review of Models, Method, and Findings. Psychological Bulletin 88(1): 60-77.
Kabanoff, Boris and O''Brien, Gordon E. (1980) Work and Leisure: A Task Attributes Analysis. Journal of Applied Psychology 65(5): 596-609.
Kando, Thomas M. and Worth C. Summers (1970) The Impact of Work on Leisure: Toward a Paradigm and Research Strategy. Pacific Sociological Review 14(3):310-327.
Kelly, John R. (1995) Leisure and the Family. Pp. 44-54 in Sociology of Leisure, edited by Critcher, P. Brambam and A. Tomlinson. Chelsea School: UK.
Lewis, Susan (2003) The Integration of Paid Work and the Rest of Life— Is Post- Industrial Work the New Leisure? Leisure Studies 22(2): 343-355.
Lu, Luo and Michael Argyle (1993) TV Watching, Soap Opera and Happiness. Kaohsiung Journal of Medical Sciences 9(9): 501-507.
Mclean, Daniel D. , Amy R. Haurd, and Nancy B. Rogers (2005) Basic Concepts: Philosophical Analysis of Play, Recreation, and Leisure. Pp. 32-38 in Kraus’ Recreation and Leisure in Modern Society, edited by Daniel D. Mclean , Amy R. Haurd and Nancy B. Rogers. MA: Jones and Bartlett.
Mattingly, Marybeth J. and Suzanne M. Bianchi (2003) Gender Differences in the Quantity and Quality of Free Time: The U.S. Experience. Social Forces 81(3): 999-1030.
Meissner, Martin (1971) The Long Arm of the Job: A Study of Work and Leisure. Industrial Relations 10(3): 239-260.
Miller, Lynn E. and Richard M. Weiss (1982) The Work-Leisure Relationship: Evidence for The Compensatory Hypothesis. Human Relations 1982(35): 763-771.
Newman, Otto (1983) The Coming of a Leisure Society? Leisure Studies 2(1): 97-109.
Nock, Steven L. and Paul W. Kingston (1989) The Division of Leisure and Work. Social Science Quarterly 70(1): 24- 39.
Parker, Stanley (1983) The work—Leisure Relationship. Pp.75-80 in Leisure and Work, edited by Stanley Parker. London: Allen and Unwin.
Pearce, Jone L. (1998) Job Insecurity is Important, but not for the Reasons You Might Think: The Example of Contingent Workers. Journal of Organizational Behavior 5: 31-46.
Peters, Pascale (1999) Time Allocation in Times of Structural Transformation: A Synchronic View on (Gender) Differences in the Netherlands. Time & Society 8(2): 329-56.
Reith, Gerda (2004) Uncertain Times: The Notion of ‘Risk’ and the Development of Modernity. Time & Society 13(2): 383-402.
Roberts, Kenneth (1995a) Great Britain: Socioeconomic Polarisation and the Implications for Leisure. Pp.6-19 in Sociology of Leisure, edited by Critcher, Bramham and A. Tomlinson.
－ (1995b) Work and Its Corollaries. Pp 38-42 in Sociology of Leisure, edited by Critcher, P. Brambam and A. Tomlinson. Chelsea School: UK.
Robinson, John P. (1981) Television and leisure time: A new scenario. Journal of Communication 31(1): 120-130.
Rode, Joseph C. and Janet P. Near(2005) Spillover between Work Attitudes and Overall Life Attitudes: Myth or Reality? Social Indicators Research 70(1): 79-109.
Rojek, Chris (2001) Leisure and Life Politics. Leisure Sciences 23: 115-125.
Rubin, Alan M. (1981) An Examination of Television Viewing Motivations. Communication Research 8(2): 141-165.
Sage, George H.(1980) Parental Influence and Socialization Into Sport for Male and Female Intercollegiate Athletes. Journal of Sport & Social Issues 4(1): 1-13.
Samdahl, Diane M. and Nancy J. Jekubovich (1997). A critique of leisure constraints: Comparative analyses and understandings. Journal of Leisure Research 29(4): 430-453.
Scales, Alice M. and Ock Rhee (2001) Adult Reading Habits and Patterns. Reading Psychology 22(3): 175–203.
Small, Stephen A. and Dave Riley (1990) Toward a Multidimensional Assessment of Work Spillover into Family Life. Journal of Marriage and the Family 52(1): 51-61.
Staines, Graham L. (1980) Spillover Versus Compensation: A Review of the Literature on the Relationship Between Work and Nonwork. Human Relations 33(2): 111-129.
Stier, Haya and Noah Lewin-Epstein (2003) Time to Work: A Comparative Analysis of Preferences for Working Hours. Work and Occupations 30(3): 302-320.
Wilensky, Harold L. (1960) Work, Careers and Social Integration. International Social Science Journal 12(4): 543-560.
Witte, Hans D. (1999) Job Insecurity and Psychological Well-being: Review of the Literature and Exploration of Some Unresolved Issues. European of Work and Organizational Psychology 8(2): 155-177.