Playful sport design: A game changer?

Figures & data

Table 1. Results of the analysis of item parameters, EFA, and CFA phase 1.

						EFA		CFA
						Factor		Factor
	Mean	SD	αd if item deleted	rids	rits	1	2	1	2
Designing Fun (α = .88)
1 I approach my training sessions creatively to make them more interesting.	3.84	1.52	.85	.71	.62	.66	.16	.74
2 I approach my training sessions in a playful way.	3.90	1.44	.88	.57	.43	.64	.09	.57
5 I look for fantasy in the things I need to do during training sessions.	3.56	1.61	.85	.72	.68	.83	.13	.86
6 I look for ways to make my training session more fun for everyone involved.	4.00	1.62	.86	.65	.63	.53	.29	.68
9 I use my imagination to make training sessions more interesting.	3.57	1.60	.85	.75	.69	.93	.25	.88
10 I look for ways to make my training sessions more fun.	4.04	1.52	.85	.71	.68	.62	.25	.73
Designing Competition (α = .83)
3 I push myself to do better during training sessions, even when it isn’t expected.	4.88	1.43	.79	.64	.59	.29	.81		.73
4 I approach my training sessions as a series of exciting challenges.	4.35	1.52	.79	.62	.66	.23	.61		.81
7 I compete with myself during training sessions, not because I have to, but because I enjoy it.	4.72	1.54	.78	.70	.61	..29	.90		.73
8 I try to make my training sessions into a series of exciting challenges.	4.25	1.53	.79	.65	.74	.22	.61		.85
11 I try to keep score in all kinds of training activities.	4.22	1.91	.81	.55	.43	.25	.50		.51
12 I try to set time records in my training sessions.	3.36	1.81	.83	.45	.36	.17	.42		.37

Note. Results of EFA and CFA to test factor structure of PSD items. EFA: exploratory factor analysis (N = 281); CFA: Confirmatory Factor Analysis for Final Model 1 (N = 281). Results of analysis of Mean, SD, α_d if item deleted: alpha-level of dimension if item deleted; r_ids: item corrected correlation to dimension score; r_its: corrected item correlation to total score (N = 562).

Table 2. Model fit results of CFA phase 1.

Model	χ^2	df	RMSEA	TLI	CFI	Comparison	Δ χ^2	df	p
Final Model 1: Two-Factor Model	194.73	50	.10	.90	.92
Initial Model 1: Two-Factor Model	320.43	53	.13	.83	.86
Final Model 2: One-Factor Model	422.50	51	.16	.75	.81	FM1–FM2	227.78	1	.001
Initial Model 2: One-Factor Model	582.46	54	.19	.66	.72	M1–M2	262.03	1	.001
Null Model	1979.46	66	.32

Note. CFA testing one and two factor model of PSD (N = 281). χ²: chi-square; df: degrees of freedom; RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation; TLI: Tucker Lewis Index; CFI: comparative fit index; Δχ²: chi-square difference.

Table 3. Results of the bivariate correlation analysis Phase 1 and 2.

	Mean	SD	1.	2.	3.	4.	5.	6.	7.	8.	9.	10.	11.	12.	13.	14.	15.	16.
Phase 1
1. PSD	4.06	1.06	(.88)
2. DF	3.82	1.22	.88**	(.88)
3. DC	4.30	1.19	.87**	.53**	(.83)
4. Competitiveness	5.50	0.80	.38**	.22**	.44**	(.69)
5. Fantasy Proneness	3.38	1.36	.23**	.25**	.15**	−.01	(.87)
6. Personal Initiative	5.33	0.80	.31**	.22**	.32**	.58**	.00	(.84)
7. Playfulness	4.48	1.32	.25**	.32**	.12**	.10*	.38**	.16**	(.90)
8. Negative affect	2.58	0.75	.07	.03	.08*	−.12**	.32**	−.16**	.03	(.81)
Phase 2
9. PSD	4.12	1.09									(.88)
10. DF	4.00	1.24									.89**	(.88)
11. DC	4.23	1.19									.89**	.60**	(.83)
12. Openness to Experience	4.88	0.92									.43**	.49**	.28**	(.83)
13. Achievement Striving	5.66	0.74									.29**	.19*	.32**	.29**	(.83)
14. Fun Seeking	4.88	1.01									.23**	.20*	.20*	.47**	.39**	(.75)
15. Perfectionism	3.67	1.29									−.11	−.23**	.03	−.17	−.20*	−.12	(.87)
16. Procrastination	3.06	1.24									−.20	−.09	−.09	−.04	−.32**	−.18*	.28**	(.90)

Note. Bivariate correlation analysis to test convergent and divergent validity. Cronbach’s alpha presented on the diagonal, in between brackets. PSD: playful sport design; DF: designing fun; DC: designing competition. Phase 1 (N = 562), phase 2 (N = 131). **p < .001, *p < .05.

Table 4. Model fit results of CFA phase 3.

Model	χ^2	df	RMSEA	TLI	CFI	Comparison	Δχ^2	df	p
Final Model 1: Two-Factor Model	153.11	52	.10	.89	.91
Initial Model 1: Two-Factor Model	211.67	53	.12	.83	.86
Final Model 2: One-Factor Model	345.85	53	.16	.68	.75	FM1–FM2	192.74	1	.001
Initial Model 2: One-Factor Model	419.95	54	.18	.62	.69	M1–M2	99.52	1	.001
Null Model	1,235.69	66	.31

Note. CFA testing one and two factor model of PSD (N = 212). χ²: chi-square; df: degrees of freedom; RMSEA: root mean square error of approximation; TLI: Tucker Lewis Index; CFI: comparative fit index; Δχ²: chi-square difference.

Table 5. Synthesis of evidence.

Hypotheses		Overall support	Difference between DF and DC?
Phase 1
Factorial validity
H1	PSD consists of two dimensions: designing fun and designing competition	+	Unique indicators for both dimensions
Construct validity
H2	PSD is positively related to playfulness	+	Both positively related; DF > DC
H3	PSD is positively related to fantasy proneness	+	Both positively related; DF > DC
H4	PSD is positively related to competitiveness	+	Both positively related; DF < DC
H5	PSD is positively related to personal initiative	+	Both positively related; DF < DC
H6	PSD is not or only marginally related to negative affect	+	DF unrelated, and DC weakly positively related
Phase 2
Construct validity
H7	PSD is positively related to fun-seeking	+	No difference; Both positively related
H8	PSD is positively related to achievement striving	+	No difference; Both positively related
H9	PSD is positively related to openness to experience	+	Both positively related; DF > DC
H10	PSD is not or only marginally related to perfectionism	+	DF weakly negatively related, and DC unrelated to perfectionism
H11	PSD is not or only marginally related to procrastination	+	No difference; Both unrelated
Predictive validity
H12	PSD is positively related to flow	+	No difference; Both positively related
H13	PSD is positively related to subjective performance	+	DF positively related, and DC unrelated
H14	PSD is positively related to objective performance	−	DF unrelated, and DC positively related
Phase 3
Predictive validity
H15	PSD is positively related to subjective performance	+	DF unrelated, and DC positively related
H16	PSD is positively related to objective performance	+	DF unrelated, and DC positively related

Note. PSD: playful sport design; DF: designing fun; DC: designing competition. +: support for hypothesis, −: no support for hypothesis.