An ongoing debate points to a possible gap between the published research about and the delivery of leisure services. For example, two of the major research journals in the field of leisure studies, "Journal of Leisure Research" ("JLR") and "Journal of Parks and Recreation Administration" ("JPRA"), are intended for different audiences, yet researchers are far more likely than practitioners to read both journals. Little empirical research has been conducted to explain the possible reasons for these readership disparities. This exploration utilized rhetorical analysis techniques to examine three matched article sets to determine if the science was accommodated for the distinct intended audiences of the two journals. The findings suggested that the ways in which the research was accommodated for the distinct intended audiences was inconsistent. Significance of the findings and recommendations for future accommodation of science in leisure studies are discussed.