Seven core qualities of good vs. bad play?

Andreas Lieberoth^1*Helle Marie Skovbjerg^2*Astrid L. Lehrmann^3,4Pernille Strand¹Jens-Ole Jensen⁵Hanne Hede Jørgensen⁵Janne Hedegaard Hansen⁶Anne-Lene Sand²Andreas Roepstorff⁷

• ¹Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark
• ²Designskolen Kolding, Kolding, Denmark
• ³Aarhus Universitetshospital, Aarhus, Denmark
• ⁴Aarhus Universitet, Aarhus, Denmark
• ⁵VIA University College - Campus Aarhus C, Aarhus, Denmark
• ⁶Kobenhavns Professionshojskole, Copenhagen, Denmark
• ⁷Aarhus University Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies, Aarhus, Denmark

This study presents two factor structures suggesting that the qualities and features that children ascribe to subjectively good and bad play situations can be broken down to a relatively low number of central factors. Attempts to model or quantify play have often focused on behaviors, developmental abilities, and pedagogical functions, rather than situational characteristics seen from the child's perspective. Qualitative studies focused on children's experiences, on the other hand, often fail to draw patterns across large numbers of children and situations. By asking 504 primary school students to recall a recent good or bad play experience, and asking them to match these with short sample statements detailing similar experiences previously collected from the age group, we were able to extract clusters of situational features comprising of 22 and 7 unique dimensions using principal component analysis (PCA). Results show that while some emerging qualities like 'being 1 Danish School of Education (DPU), Aarhus University, Denmark 2 Kolding School of Design, Kolding, Denmark 3 Via University College, Aarhus, Denmark 4 Center for better childhood, University College Copenhagen, Copenhagen, Denmark 5 Aarhus Institute of Advanced Studies (AIAS), Aarhus University, Denmark Seven core qualities of good vs bad play? 2 silly' or 'keeping boundaries' appear uniquely related to discrete activities and preferences, more general factors including 'social unity', having 'a role to play', being 'allowed in', and feeling equipped to participate 'well enough', emerge as highly stable dimensions defining good or bad play experiences across grades, schools and types of play. Findings are combined to propose a seven-dimensional 'Play Qualities Inventory' (PQI) for self-report by children ages five to eleven, while the broader backdrop of smaller unique factors provide a new and grounded understanding of the multidimensionality of 'good' versus 'bad' play as seen through the eyes of children.