Designing fun explains additional variance in peer interactions and popularity beyond core self-evaluations and PsyCap, whereas designing competition does not¶

Claim · All claims
Evidence · 1 study (2 entries) · associational r2 · q3
Currency · newest study 2025 · not yet checked against its sources · not reviewed by a person

Subclaims¶

q3 i? Designing fun predicted formal and informal peer interactions and popularity over and above CSE and PsyCap. → Costantini 2025 q3 i? Designing competition did not meaningfully contribute to social integration outcomes beyond personal resources and designing fun. → Costantini 2025 (2)

Evidence¶

Costantini 2025¶

Costantini, A., Bakker, A. B., & Scharp, Y. S. (2025). Playful Study Design: A Novel Approach to Enhancing Student Well-Being and Academic Performance. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10022-6

q3 · i? · associational · r2

Hierarchical regressions on the full Study 1 sample (N = 753) entered CSE and PsyCap first and PSD dimensions second, with peer interactions and popularity as outcomes. "Designing fun explained additional variance (over and above CSE and PsyCap)" in all three social integration outcomes.

"designing fun explained additional variance (over and above CSE and PsyCap) in formal and informal peer interactions and popularity, supporting Hypothesis 4a."

Costantini 2025 (2)¶

Costantini, A., Bakker, A. B., & Scharp, Y. S. (2025). Playful Study Design: A Novel Approach to Enhancing Student Well-Being and Academic Performance. Educational Psychology Review. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10648-025-10022-6

q3 · i? · associational · r2

In the same hierarchical regression analyses, the competition dimension failed to add incremental prediction of the social integration outcomes; the authors state "Hypothesis 4b is rejected" and interpret designing fun as more closely tied to social dynamics.

"Hypothesis 4b is rejected as designing competition did not meaningfully contribute to social integration outcomes beyond personal resources and designing fun."

Discussion¶

Related Claims¶

• Both PSD dimensions explain variance in study engagement and subjective well-being beyond core self-evaluations and PsyCap, with designing competition contributing most to engagement — related
• PSD dimensions correlate with trait curiosity, and playfulness correlates with designing fun but not designing competition, supporting the scale's convergent and discriminant validity — related
• A quasi-experimental PSD training intervention increased students' use of fun and competition when studying, with greater active learning, study task proactivity and absorption over time — related
• Playful study design is measured as a two-dimensional construct of designing fun and designing competition, supported by exploratory and confirmatory factor analyses — related