Revisiting the English Short Measure for Adult Playfulness (SMAP): An Investigation of Reliability, Validity, and Cross-Cultural Comparisons
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Adult playfulness describes the personality of the quick initiation and strong intensity of enjoyable experiences coupled with the frequency of engaging in playful behaviors. In addition to examining the reliability and validity of the Short Measure for Adult Playfulness (SMAP), we compared the psychometric properties of the SMAP across (a) 4- and 7-point answer formats; (b) German and English language versions; and (c) gender. The SMAP and criterion validity measures were distributed across three independent samples from Canada (Ntotal = 1,177) and a German sample (N = 660). Results supported a unidimensional solution with strong factor loadings for all items (>.50 across all samples) and high test-retest reliability (r = .67, BF10>100). In item response theory analyses, high discrimination parameters were found across the latent continuum. Although both the four-point and seven-point Likert scale versions showed robust item properties, the seven-point Likert scale version yielded more precise measurement of higher playfulness (θ > 1.50). No significant differential item functioning was located across gender or language. Finally, results supported external construct validity via associations with broad personality traits, humor, and orientations to happiness. The present investigation provides support for the reliability and validity of the English SMAP for concise adult playfulness measurement.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.010 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".