Abstract
General Abstract
Understanding the Underutilization of the Campus Recreation Facility:
A Mixed-Methods Examination of Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction,
Social Physique Anxiety, Sense of Community, and Physical Environment Barriers
Caden Miles Pfingsten
Department of Health and Human Performance, Fort Hays State University
May 2026
General Abstract
This study investigated why students at a mid-sized Midwestern public university elect to pay for off-campus commercial gym memberships rather than use the on-campus Campus Recreation Facility (CRF), which is available at no additional direct cost. A cross-sectional quantitative survey (N = 169) was administered to students across six fitness facility groups. Validated and researcher-adapted instruments assessed basic psychological need satisfaction (autonomy, competence, and relatedness; BPNES), sense of community (researcher-adapted SCI-2), social physique anxiety (researcher-developed measure), and physical activity (modified GLTEQ), alongside a researcher-developed physical environment barriers scale. One-way ANOVAs revealed that CRF users reported significantly lower autonomy, competence, relatedness, and sense of community than users of competing facilities. Physical environment factors — crowding, limited spatial capacity, and equipment constraints — were the most salient barriers. A simultaneous multiple linear regression identified relatedness (β = .735) as the overwhelmingly dominant predictor of sense of community among CRF users (R² = .732). Findings suggest that while physical infrastructure improvements require significant investment, intentional social programming and relatedness-building represent the most immediately actionable pathway to improving student engagement with the campus fitness environment.
Detailed Abstract
Background
Campus recreation facilities are increasingly recognized as central contributors to student well-being, academic persistence, and institutional belonging. Research demonstrates that students who regularly use campus recreation facilities report higher rates of retention, greater campus social belonging, and improved physical and mental health outcomes compared to non-users (Kampf & Teske, 2013; Zegre et al., 2022). Despite these documented benefits, a persistent gap exists between available services and actual student utilization, with many students electing to seek fitness services at off-campus commercial gyms even when campus facilities are accessible at no additional cost (Stankowski et al., 2017). At the study institution, a pattern of students paying out-of-pocket for commercial gym memberships — despite the CRF being available through the tuition fee model — prompted an investigation of the psychological, social, and physical environment factors driving students' facility preferences.
Purpose
The primary purpose of this study was to examine the factors associated with students' underutilization of the Campus Recreation Facility in favor of paid off-campus commercial gym memberships. Specific aims were to: (a) identify the physical environment barriers most frequently reported by non-CRF users; (b) compare levels of basic psychological need satisfaction, social physique anxiety, and sense of community across students using different fitness facilities; (c) examine associations between demographic characteristics and facility selection; and (d) identify the psychological predictors that best explain sense of community among CRF users.
Theoretical Framework
The study was grounded in Self-Determination Theory (SDT; Deci & Ryan, 1985; Ryan & Deci, 2000) and Social Physique Anxiety (SPA) Theory (Hart, Leary, & Rejeski, 1989). SDT posits that environments supporting the basic psychological needs of autonomy, competence, and relatedness sustain intrinsic motivation and behavioral engagement. SPA Theory addresses the anxious affect individuals experience when they believe others are evaluating their physique negatively — a particularly salient concern in shared fitness environments. Taken together, these frameworks provide a dual-pathway model in which physical environment limitations simultaneously thwart SDT needs and elevate social physique anxiety, both of which are expected to erode sense of community and reduce sustained facility engagement.
Methods
A cross-sectional quantitative survey was administered via Qualtrics to FHSU students between November 2025 and February 2026 (N = 169; analytic N = 133 across five facility groups). Participants were categorized by primary fitness facility: the Campus Recreation Facility (CRF; n = 70), a Private Commercial Strength Facility (PCSF; n = 23), a Municipal Community Recreation Center (MCRC; n = 16), an Independent Close Access Gym (ICAG; n = 14), and a Hospital-Affiliated Rehabilitation Fitness Center (HRFC; n = 10). Instrumentation included a researcher-adapted version of the Basic Psychological Needs in Exercise Scale (BPNES; Vlachopoulos & Michailidou, 2006), a researcher-adapted sense of community measure informed by the SCI-2 (Chavis et al., 2008), a researcher-developed social physique anxiety measure grounded in Hart et al. (1989) and Motl and Conroy (2000), a modified Godin Leisure-Time Exercise Questionnaire (GLTEQ), and a researcher-developed nine-item physical environment barriers scale. Analyses included one-way ANOVAs with Tukey HSD post-hoc comparisons (Research Questions 1–2), chi-square tests of independence (Research Question 3), and a simultaneous multiple linear regression (Research Question 4).
Results
Physical environment barriers were the most salient perceived obstacles to CRF use. Crowdedness (M = 4.27), facility size (M = 4.02), and equipment limitations (M = 3.82) ranked as the top three barriers on a five-point scale. One-way ANOVAs revealed statistically significant between-group differences in autonomy, F(4, 128) = 4.116, p = .004, η² = .114; competence, F(4, 128) = 5.204, p < .001, η² = .140; relatedness, F(4, 128) = 3.854, p = .005, η² = .107; and sense of community, F(4, 128) = 4.554, p = .002, η² = .124. CRF users reported the lowest mean scores on all four outcomes across every facility group. Tukey HSD post-hoc tests indicated that CRF users scored significantly lower than PCSF users on autonomy, competence, and relatedness, and significantly lower than HRFC users on sense of community. Social physique anxiety showed a directionally consistent pattern — CRF users reporting the highest mean (M = 2.63) and PCSF users the lowest (M = 1.93) — though the omnibus ANOVA did not reach significance (p = .078). No significant associations were found between gender, academic major area, or athlete status and facility selection, though descriptive gender patterns were consistent with expectations from the literature. A simultaneous multiple linear regression predicting sense of community among CRF users (n = 70) produced a significant model, F(4, 65) = 44.283, p < .001, R² = .732, with relatedness emerging as the only statistically significant predictor (B = 7.555, β = .735, p < .001).
Discussion and Conclusions
The results present a coherent account of CRF underutilization consistent with SDT and SPA Theory. Physical environment constraints — particularly crowding and limited spatial capacity stemming from the facility's occupation of a non-purpose-built space — function as the primary structural barriers, systematically thwarting students' needs for autonomy and competence. The regression finding that relatedness explains the vast majority of variance in sense of community (R² = .732) identifies the social environment as the most powerful and immediately actionable lever for institutional improvement. Unlike physical renovation, programming strategies targeting social connection are achievable within existing resource constraints. Specific recommendations include structured beginner orientation programs, recurring group workout formats, and staff training in relatedness-supportive interaction. The CRF's approximately gender-balanced user composition represents an underutilized asset in a local fitness market dominated by gender-skewed commercial facilities. Limitations include a cross-sectional design, convenience sampling, instrumentation adaptations from validated measures, small group sizes for several facility categories, and the absence of a completed physical environment audit. Findings are intended to provide an empirical foundation for evidence-based facility improvement and programming decisions at the institutional level.
Keywords
campus recreation, Self-Determination Theory, social physique anxiety, sense of community, basic psychological needs, fitness facility utilization, student well-being
Faculty Advisor
Dr. Justin Montney
Department/Program
Health and Human Performance
Submission Type
in-person poster
Date
4-13-2026
Rights
Copyright the Author(s)
Recommended Citation
Pfingsten, Caden M.
(2026)
"Understanding the Underutilization of the Campus Recreation Facility: A Mixed-Methods Examination of Basic Psychological Need Satisfaction, Social Physique Anxiety, Sense of Community, and Physical Environment Barriers,"
SACAD: Scholarly Activities: Vol. 2026, Article 10.
Available at:
https://scholars.fhsu.edu/sacad/vol2026/iss2026/10
