The first step in searching for relevant literature involved identifying suitable databases and journals. The selection process considered the academic quality and relevance to information science as selection criteria. The two languages that were considered were English and German. To find potential candidates, the author consulted curated information science journal databases available through university libraries. For a broader search across databases and journals, the Open Public Access Catalogues of the respective libraries, as well as Google Scholar were included. Table 1 provides an overview of all the chosen databases and journals for investigation. As a last step, the paper by Hartel et al. (2016) was used as a starting point to conduct forward chaining using the Web of Science, aiming to identify any additional relevant publications. Unfortunately, Hektor’s doctoral thesis could not be found on Web of Science and, therefore, could not be included in the chaining process.

To comprehensively search for literature related to leisure even if the serious leisure perspective was not explicitly taken up by the author, but implied in the context of the activity, a broad approach was adopted for searching the databases and journals. The search was limited to publications starting from 2017, as it was assumed that no publication would be written and published within such a brief time as the same year as Hartel et al.’s article.

The initial search involved combining the terms “information” and “entertainment”, with an added “information science” for databases or journals not specialised in information science. This approach tried to capture even the broadest investigations of leisure activities. The more specific search terms regarding serious leisure were derived from the central concepts of Kari and Hartels’ (2007) and Gorichanaz’s (2019) articles, focusing on higher/lower contexts of information and personal meaning, with an added information science in non-purely information science journals and databases. The search was, where possible, set to all fields, including titles, abstracts and full text. In a second step, to narrow the search, the terms “leisure”, “serious leisure”, “information activities” and “information seeking” were searched for and combined. For a full list of the terms that were used, see Table 2. The terms were always connected using the Boolean AND operator. Even though in some cases, where it could not be set in an extra field in the Advanced search, it could not be ensured that the system actually used it.

In each iteration of the search of each database/journal, the first 100 results were examined. This number was determined after conducting initial search iterations in Emerald Insight, Library & Information Science Source and Library & Information Science & Technology Abstracts and observing that no relevant publications were found beyond that cut-off point.

For German databases, the English search terms were translated into German, except for serious leisure. As this term has no counterpart in the German language and is a specific concept, it was assumed that if referred to, it would be done so using its original English name. For the German translations of the English search terms, see Table 3.

The initial number of publications found was 223. Of these publications, the abstracts were read to determine if they were concerned with serious leisure. During this process, 155 publications were disregarded, leaving the sample at 68. These publications were then investigated in detail regarding their treatment of serious leisure. In this process, another 17 publications were disregarded, because they either had an abstract written in German or English, but were not written in either of the two languages and therefore unintelligible to the author (e.g. Solhjoo, 2021), or because they only mentioned the concept of serious leisure, without making it part of investigation (e.g. Ocepek, 2018). The publications were then thoroughly read, in the case of journal articles and conference papers, in their entirety or the relevant chapter(s) corresponding to one of the research questions, in the case of doctoral theses. After reading, a decision had to be made regarding what qualified as serious leisure and what did not. Studies that focused on possible serious leisure activities but were centred around professionals (e.g. Terrile, 2022; Vamanu and Terronez, 2022), were disregarded. This left the sample at 51 publications. The number of publications which were then identified as being applicable to either of the three research questions were 19. The selection process is depicted in Figure 2.

The final sample was first categorised into three subgroups, mirroring the three research questions: Hektor’s framework, embodiment and superabundance. Publications were allowed to be part of more than one subgroup if they addressed more than one of the research questions. The sources in the Hektor’s framework subgroup were then analysed regarding the topics the publications cover, to which extent Hektor’s framework is employed and how each information activity is present across the publications. Within each information activity, categories were then inductively allowed to emerge following the structuring content analysis by Kuckartz & Rädiker (2022). The publications regarding embodiment were first divided into the categories conceptual/theoretical and empirical. The conceptual/theoretical publications were summarised to highlight their main points. The empirical publications were analysed using two questions derived from the conceptual/theoretical publication by Cox et al. (2017): 1) How is embodiment defined? 2) Are the categories of body as information source and body as sign applicable to the empirical studies? During this process, the publications were read and every instance in which the authors offered a definition of embodiment was recorded. Following, the results of each publication were deductively categorised in either body as information source or body as sign as established by Cox et al. (2017). Within these categories, subcategories were allowed to inductively emerge. The publications of superabundance were analysed regarding the context in which superabundance is mentioned.

Nine publications include Hektor’s framework (Table 4). As indicated in Table 4, the studies that mention Hektor’s framework encompass a wide range of serious leisure topics. These include sports such as ultrarunning, less intense bodily activities like hiking and backpacking, activities related to basic needs such as cooking, but also fan communities and idol fans, social media creators in the realm of YouTube-lifestyle and amateur classical musicianship. However, the extent to which Hektor’s framework is used varies across these studies.

One publication briefly mentions Hektor’s framework as an example for discussing the types and dynamics of information activities without further utilisation (Hyatt et al., 2021, p. 685). Two studies solely focus on the dress activity within the framework. Thomson (2018) uses it as an exemplification to conceptualise content creation on YouTube (p. 24) and in everyday life (p. 33), without further referencing it. Price (2017) emphasises the relevance of the dress activity in the creation of information objects by fan communities (pp. 286-287), such as wikis, fanfiction or fanart (p. 292).

Out of the nine publications, six authors utilise (or plan to utilise, as in the case of Munro et al., 2022a) Hektor’s framework as an analytical tool to classify information activities in their respective studies. However, it is important to note that among the five publications that have employed the framework, two are by the same author (Gorichanaz, 2017, 2018), one is written by one of the coauthors of the original article that introduced Hektor’s framework (Griffin, 2020) and one is merely a conference paper accompanying a poster presentation (Zheng, 2022). Therefore, excluding Griffin and subsuming both publications by Gorichanaz, it can be concluded that three authors, have utilised Hektor’s framework since its introduction in 2016. These authors are Gorichanaz (2017, 2018), Tsai and Chen (2021) and Zheng (2022). Munro et al. (2022a) might join this list once their study has progresses further but can as of now not be considered as utilising the framework. For an overview of how Hektor’s framework is employed, see Table 5

Overall, four studies (Gorichanaz, 2017; Gorichanaz, 2018; Griffin, 2020; Zheng, 2022) employ Hektor’s framework in a qualitative research design. In contrast, Tsai and Chen (2021) present a quantitative approach, utilising the activities as items in conjunction with a serious leisure score based on Stebbins’s six aspects of serious leisure (perseverance, career, effort, durable benefits, unique ethos, and identity) in a survey to determine their frequency across various stages of serious leisure cooking. Tsai and Chen demonstrate that search and retrieve, browse, monitor and unfold are prevalent in cooking as serious leisure. Among these activities browsing is the only one that exhibits differences in various situations (p. 170 & 171). Additionally, all activities increase when participant have higher serious leisure scores (p. 170).

Regarding the qualitative studies, each activity is individually examined to identify differences or similarities in the results. However, not all outcomes of each study are presented, as it was judged that including all results would unnecessarily clutter the review without adding any value (e.g., Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 346). Instead, representative examples of activity types from each study are chosen.

Regarding the search and retrieve activity, web retrieval is the only method employed across studies. For instance, ultrarunners search for race reports before upcoming races (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 466) or look up suspected injuries (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 347). Musicians search for information on injury rehabilitation (Griffin, 2020, p. 157) or search for advice on etudes/repertoires or instrument repair (Griffin, 2020, p. 194). Idol fans use the web to gather information in general (Zheng, 2022, p. 3).

Concerning the browse activity, two distinct approaches are observed. The first involves personal browsing, exemplified by turning to a brother for information who was a former collegial runner (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 347). The second, more prevalent approach, involves online browsing, such as browsing the web for race reports when deciding on new races to participate in (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 466), checking running calendars (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 347) or browsing social media platforms like Facebook (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 343), Sina Weibo, Twitter, Instagram or Bilibili (Zheng, 2022, p. 3).

Regarding the monitoring activity, three distinct aspects are identified. The first is the monitoring of physical, paper-based recurring magazines, as observed in the runners’ monitoring of an ultrarunning magazine (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 466). The second involves monitoring online news portals (Gorichanaz, 2017; p. 467, Griffin, 2020, p. 194) or social media platforms (e.g. being a part of an ultrarunning Facebook group [Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 467]), monitoring YouTube for videos of a favourite performer (Griffin, 2020, p. 189) or following idols on various social media platforms (Zheng, 2022, p. 3). The third aspect relates to embodied monitoring, which involves monitoring the body as a source of information. For example, checking the effectiveness of a stretching technique by monitoring the body’s response to ultrarunning exercises over time (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 348).

Concerning the unfold activity, four distinct approaches are identified, here referred to as visual, audio, embodied and embodied/cognitive. Visual unfolding occurs through reading, such as reading race reports (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 467) or reading materials on violinist.com (Griffin, 2020, p. 194). It also involves watching, like watching filmed performances (Griffin, 2020, p. 136 & 141), stage performances (Zheng, 2022, p. 3), or observing a brother showing one a stretch (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 347). Additionally, it can include merely looking at a GPS watch (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 348). However, it can be assumed that watching a brother perform a stretch may lead to the embodied aspect of unfolding, where one replicates the movement, making this activity a hybrid between the two. The audio aspect is demonstrated when a brother conveys that training through an injury is possible ( Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 348). Although visual and audio aspects are treated separately to emphasise the primary input, they are usually intertwined. The third aspect involves embodied unfolding, which manifests as feeling tired (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 348) or experiencing pain (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 348). An additional and more unusual aspect is the repetitive practice to build or establish muscle memory (Griffin, 2020, p. 138). Two instances of unfolding information that sit between the embodied and cognitive are ’vicariously experiencing a race’ (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 467) and ’mental practice’ of a musical performance (Griffin, 2020, p. 141). On the one hand, they represent cognitive processes, on the other, the imagination incorporates envisioned muscle movement, thus straddling the line between the embodied and cognitive aspects.

When it comes to the exchange activity, not much can be said. All instances of exchanging are confined to the ultrarunning topic, making it challenging to compare them with other activities, to build categories. However, within the context of ultrarunning, exchanging is mentioned as reading about a technique, trying it out and using the body as a feedback source for evaluation (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 467). Additionally, reading about markers being difficult to see and then paying close attention to them during the race ( Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 467), are mentioned as examples of exchanging.

Moving on to the dress activity as an act of information creation (Thomson, 2018, p. 24), two primary approaches can be identified: creating physical artefacts and embodied dressing. In terms of physical artefacts, dressing takes on various forms. This includes writing towards others, such as composing race reports detailing personal ultrarunning experiences (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 467), creating encyclopaedic (e.g. wikis) or transformative (e.g. fanfiction) articles (Price, 2017, p. 289 & 292) or towards oneself, as in coded information on sheet music (Griffin, 2020, p. 130). Other forms include painting fanart (Griffin, 2020, p. 130; Zheng, 2022, p. 3) or creating diverse types of fan artefacts like translations ( Zheng, 2022, p. 3). Embodied dressing is evident in the musical context, where dressing information is conveyed by an artist to an audience through performance (Griffin, 2020, p. 138), music teachers dressing information during instruction by exaggerating movements ( Griffin, 2020, p. 160) or members sharing information during group performances ( Griffin, 2020, p. 160). In the context of ultrarunning, dressing information occurs when a brother demonstrates a stretching exercise, effectively conveying how to perform it (Gorichanaz, 2018, p. 347) (not categorised by Gorichanaz as such but can be inferred from the brother’s perspective).

Regarding the instruct activity, two categories emerge: instructing oneself and instructing others. Instructing oneself entails actions like writing codes on sheet music for a later performance (which simultaneously encompasses dressing) (Griffin, 2020, p. 130). Instructing others involves activities such as providing instructions within race reports (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 467), delivering explicit music lessons (which is also simultaneously part of dressing) (Griffin, 2020, p. 159) or core fans guiding others in a fandom (Zheng, 2022, p. 3).

The final activity, publishing, is exclusively observed in an online context, involving activities like writing and publishing race reports (Gorichanaz, 2017, p. 467) or publishing content on social media, such as singles, stage performances or schedules (Zheng, 2022, p. 3).

Table 6 provides an overview of the categories. Overall, certain activities stand out more prominently than others. For instance, search and retrieve, browse, monitor, unfold and dress are consistently observed with distinct characteristics, while exchange, instruct and publish appear less frequently. It is worth mentioning that there are overlaps between the activities of dress and instruct unlike in any of the other categories. Additionally, embodiment emerges as an important characteristic present in monitor, unfold and dress. This observation naturally leads to the next section, which focuses on publications discussing embodiment.

Fourteen publications address embodiment (Table 7). These publications can be categorised into conceptual/theoretical and empirical studies, which are treated separately in the following subsections.

The concept of superabundance is mentioned in only two papers related to serious leisure (Table 9). In Mansourian’s (2020a) article on transcendental information, the author challenges the overall acceptance of superabundance or information overload by noting that while the ‘volume of information production is greater than it ever was in history’ (pp. 33-34), not everyone necessarily faces information overload, and that there are also cases of information scarcity (p. 34). While this observation is valuable, it does not significantly contribute to the understanding of superabundance in the context of this research endeavour.

On the other hand, Hyatt et al. (2021) observe filtering techniques employed by backpackers in their study of the relationship between backpackers and mobile information technology. These backpackers counteract the superabundance of information by very carefully selecting authoritative sources such as blogs and forums or mediated word-of-mouth information from within the community (p. 692). Another interesting observation is that the need for redundancy of information, in case one method (e.g., map or smartphone) fails, can lead to other issues such as power management. However, the existence of information superabundance makes achieving redundancy easier (pp. 694-695).

In summary, since its introduction by Hartel et al. in 2016, Hektor’s framework has been utilised, enabling more comparable results, even though it has only been used in five instances. Within the two sub-areas, embodiment has garnered more attention. Despite inconsistent terminology surrounding embodiment and the difficulty of comparing results due to the diverse nature of the areas studied, the categories of body as information source and information as sign appear applicable.