Development and initial assessment of a short measure for adult playfulness: The SMAP

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.paid.2012.07.018Get rights and content

Abstract

This study reports an initial evaluation of a new short measure for adult playfulness (SMAP). In data from a construction (N = 266), and two replication samples (N = 147 students, N = 215 adults), a one-dimensional solution showed the best fit for the data and satisfactory internal consistency (.80–.89) was found (test–retest correlation = .74; 12–16 weeks). Younger adults scored higher in playfulness than older ones. The SMAP demonstrated robust correlations with measures for adult playfulness and the need for play. Cheerfulness and culture along with low seriousness and low conscientiousness were its best predictors. In ratings of an unordered work-space and a surrealistic painting, playful adults expressed higher liking for and lower disapproval of these compared to non-playful adults. Overall, the new scale yielded good psychometric properties and first evidence on its validity was encouraging. The SMAP has been developed for an economic, global assessment of adult playfulness, which is still an understudied topic in personality research.

Highlights

► There is a lack of psychometrically sound measures for adult playfulness. ► An economic five-item measure for its global assessment is presented. ► Findings on its psychometric properties and validity are encouraging. ► A new tool is available for those interested in research in adult playfulness.

Introduction

Adult playfulness is an important but understudied topic in research in personality. It is defined as “the predisposition to frame (or reframe) a situation in such a way as to provide oneself (and possibly others) with amusement, humor, and/or entertainment” (Barnett, 2007; p. 955). While play is an observable behavior, playfulness is seen as an individual differences variable, which, according to Barnett and others, enables people to transform a situation or an environment in a way to allow for enjoyment or entertainment. Most of the research in this area has been conducted with children but playfulness has also been successfully studied in adults. The distinctiveness of this characteristic has been established using a broad range of methodologies; e.g., questionnaire-based studies, focus groups, or lexical approaches (e.g., Barnett, 2007, Glynn and Webster, 1992, Proyer, in press). Relations to intrinsic motivation, creativity, flow-experiences, quality of life, or academic performance have been described frequently (e.g., Barnett, 2007, Csikszentmihalyi, 1975, Proyer, in press, Proyer, 2011, Proyer, 2012, Proyer and Ruch, 2011, Proyer et al., 2010). It is argued that more research in this area is needed for a better understanding of the construct itself but also on its correlates and consequences.

There is no agreement, however, on how to assess adult playfulness. Additionally, there is no well-validated short measure for assessing the concept in an economical way. In an effort to narrow this gap, a one-dimensional measure is presented in this study. Its items have been rationally constructed for a global self-assessment of playfulness. Items were selected on the notion that playfulness (a) can be observed by the person him-/herself and (b) by other people; (c) that playful adults frequently exhibit playful behavior; (d) can easily change from a non-playful (or serious) frame of mind to a playful one; and (e) know situations in which they were fully absorbed by a playful activity. Thus, playfulness is understood and assessed here as an easy onset and high intensity of playful experiences along with the frequent display of playful activities.

Convergent validity was examined by computing correlates with Glynn and Webster’s (1992) Adult Playfulness Scale, Jackson’s (1984) need for play-scale, and a list adjectives identified to be representative of playfulness (Barnett, 2007). Humor has been seen as a specific variant of playfulness (McGhee, 1999, Proyer and Ruch, 2011) and it was, therefore, also considered in this study. The trait scales of the State-Trait-Cheerfulness-Inventory (STCI; Ruch, Köhler, & van Thriel, 1996) measure the habitual dispositions for lowered (cheerfulness) and enhanced (seriousness, bad mood) thresholds for the induction of exhilaration and laughter. While a positive relation between playfulness and cheerfulness was expected, it is argued that seriousness covers characteristics that oppose playfulness (e.g., not being mentally set for amusement). The same is true for bad mood and its facets; sadness and ill-humouredness are seen as contributing negatively to exhibiting playfulness.

A measure of the big five personality dimensions was used in order to test the localization of playfulness in this framework. Based on earlier studies (e.g., Barnett, 1991, Proyer, 2012), it is expected that higher scores in the new measure are positively associated with extraversion, higher culture but lower conscientiousness. Furthermore, lower yet positive relations of playfulness were expected to emotional stability and agreeableness.

In a more exploratory part, the new scale was related to ratings of preferences for and aversiveness of two photographs showing structured (ordered, well-organized) in comparison to unstructured (unordered, disorganized) workplaces. Based on earlier work on personality characteristics of playful adults (e.g., Barnett, 2007, McGhee, 1999, Proyer, in press, Proyer, 2012), it is expected that those higher in playfulness show a higher preference for and lower aversiveness of the unstructured workplace than those lower in playfulness. The same hypotheses were tested for ratings (preference/aversiveness) of a painting consisting of geometric figures (rectangles of different sizes set together in a clear structure; geometric) and a surrealistic painting (depicting different forms without a clear structure; surrealistic). While the playful participants should express their liking for and lower disapproval of the unstructured working place and the surrealistic painting, no differences were expected for the ordered workplace and the geometric painting.

Section snippets

Sample

The construction sample (Sample 1) consisted of 266 adults (18–85 years; M = 33.5, SD = 14.0); about 40% were males (n = 107). Slightly more than one third were married or lived with a partner (35.3%), more than half were single or not married (57.1%). More than half held a degree from university or were currently at university (52.6%), further 17.7% held a school-leaving diploma qualifying for attending university, 22.9% had a completed vocational training.

Sample 2 (replication sample I) consisted of

Procedure

The items of the SMAP were rationally developed. An initial set of 17 items was created addressing the five aspects described in the introductory section (i.e., observation by self and others, frequency, easy onset, and absorption of playfulness) and tested for semantic similarity and redundancy by the author. Twelve undergraduate students in a course on psychometrics commented on the items. They were pretested with a small number of students and young adults. This led to the final version of

Results

Internal Structure: PCA. A principal component analysis was conducted in order to analyze the factorial structure of the SMAP. A very potent first factor emerged with an eigenvalue of 3.00 that explained 59.90% of the variance (sample 1). None of the other eigenvalues exceeded unity (i.e., 0.72, 0.50, 0.46, and 0.34). The loadings of the five items on the first unrotated factor were .81, .79, .81, .73, and .73. Thus, the items reflected the intended one-dimensional structure very well.

Discussion

This study provides an initial assessment of a short measure of adult playfulness. The SMAP demonstrated high internal consistency (⩾.80) and test–retest correlations over 12–16 weeks (rtt = .74), and a robust one-dimensional factor solution fit the data best (exploratory and confirmatory analyses). Students scored higher in single items as well as in the total score of the SMAP, giving rise to the idea of higher playfulness in younger adults (cf. Proyer et al., 2010).

The SMAP converges well with

Acknowledgement

The author is grateful to Katharina Klohe and Tracey Platt for proofreading the manuscript.

References (19)

  • L.A. Barnett

    The nature of playfulness in young adults

    Personality and Individual Differences

    (2007)
  • R.T. Proyer

    Being playful and smart? The relations of adult playfulness with psychometric and self-estimated intelligence and academic performance

    Learning and Individual Differences

    (2011)
  • L.A. Barnett

    Characterizing playfulness: Correlates with individual attributes and personality traits

    Play and Culture

    (1991)
  • M. Csikszentmihalyi

    Play and intrinsic rewards

    Journal of Humanistic Psychology

    (1975)
  • M.A. Glynn et al.

    The adult playfulness scale: An initial assessment

    Psychological Reports

    (1992)
  • J.L. Horn

    A rationale and test for the number of factors in factor analysis

    Psychometrika

    (1965)
  • L. Hu et al.

    Cut off criteria for fit indexes in covariance structure analysis: Conventional criteria versus new alternatives

    Structural Equation Modeling

    (1999)
  • D.N. Jackson

    Manual for the personality research form

    (1984)
  • N.J. Lieberman

    Playfulness: Its relationship to imagination and creativity

    (1977)
There are more references available in the full text version of this article.

Cited by (76)

View all citing articles on Scopus
View full text