Next Article in Journal
Cultural Heritage Digitization in Serbia: Standards, Policies, and Case Studies
Next Article in Special Issue
Perceived Quality in Sports Centers in Southern Spain: A Case Study
Previous Article in Journal
Methodology of Determination of the Range of Restrictions Related to the Existence of Transmission Devices on Private Land—Case Study of Poland
Previous Article in Special Issue
Analysis of Motivational Climate, Emotional Intelligence, and Healthy Habits in Physical Education Teachers of the Future Using Structural Equations
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Sustainability
Volume 11
Issue 14
10.3390/su11143787
sustainability-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Contribution of Public Playgrounds to Motor, Social, and Creative Development and Obesity Reduction in Children

by
Pedro Gil-Madrona
1,*,
María Martínez-López
2,
Alejandro Prieto-Ayuso
3,4,
Linda Saraiva
5,
Javier Vecina-Cifuentes
6,
Tomás Vicente-Ballesteros
6,
Rafael Moratilla-López
7 and
Guillermo F. López-Sánchez
8,*
1
Faculty of Education of Albacete, University of Castilla–La Mancha, 02071 Albacete, Spain
2
Faculty of Psychology, National Distance Education University (UNED), 28015 Madrid, Spain
3
Faculty of Education of Cuenca, University of Castilla–La Mancha, 16071 Cuenca, Spain
4
Albacete Balompié S.A.D., 02006 Albacete, Spain
5
School of Education, Polytechnic Institute of Viana do Castelo, 4901-908 Viana do Castelo, Portugal
6
Faculty of Law of Albacete, University of Castilla–La Mancha, 02071 Albacete, Spain
7
Faculty of Economic and Business Sciences of Albacete, University of Castilla–La Mancha, 02071 Albacete, Spain
8
Faculty of Sport Sciences, University of Murcia, 30720 Murcia, Spain
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sustainability 2019, 11(14), 3787; https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143787
Submission received: 24 June 2019 / Revised: 8 July 2019 / Accepted: 9 July 2019 / Published: 10 July 2019
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Education for Sustainability in Physical Education)
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
The objective of this work was to examine the perceptions of adults responsible for the care of children in their leisure time about the contribution of public playgrounds to motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction in children, analyzing these perceptions according to sex, age, educational level, and level of involvement in the child’s education of the participants. The sample consisted of 1019 adults responsible for the care of children in their leisure time in Albacete (Spain). A validated questionnaire was the instrument used to assess perceptions of participants on the influence of the public playgrounds in motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction of children. The instrument was validated on a first sample of convenience and had good reliability (α = 0.997) and construct validity (CFI = 0.997). The results showed that most participants agreed with the positive contribution of public playgrounds to social skills (78.8%), motor skills (53.7%), creativity (52.2%), and obesity reduction (48.8%) in children. Women, those between 30 and 49 years, those with a higher educational level and those with a higher level of involvement in the child’s education had more positive perceptions regarding the impact of public playgrounds to motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction in children. These results should be taken in consideration to foster the use of public playgrounds in all sectors of population.

1. Introduction

Life of children in large cities has been a topic of discussion and reflection in many countries [1,2,3]. In consequence, several initiatives have been put into practice in many cities in order to promote physical activity, welfare, and health in children [4,5,6,7], one of them being the creation of playing areas for children [8].
Many authors [9,10,11] have focused attention on defining these recreational areas for boys and girls. Various studies have shown that outdoor play in childhood produces results in development that cannot be achieved indoor. In the first place, we can highlight those studies that focus attention on improving cognitive and motor aspects of child development because of play in playgrounds. In this sense, the studies carried out by Fjørtoft [12,13,14] found a strong association between the number of natural characteristics in a game environment (e.g., grass, trees, hills, running water, and sand) and the level of activity of children. Additionally, children who participate in active playground games develop memory, information processing, and other cognitive skills necessary for learning [15,16]. Castelli, Hillman, Buck and Erwin [17] found a proportional relationship between play and performance in mathematics and reading in the Primary Education stage (6–12 years). Secondly, we should highlight those studies that focus on improving social skills. For example, some studies concluded great social improvements in children playing in public children’s parks [10,17,18,19,20]. Such scientific evidence must convince policymakers to increase and improve the playgrounds of cities.
As already mentioned, the literature on playgrounds is scarce. Different studies are oriented to analyze the aspects associated with the type of leisure developed by families [21,22,23], analyzing factors such as the area [24,25]. However, no specific studies have been found in the literature about the socio-economic status of children, or analyzing the perception and convictions that families have about the possible benefits of playful activities, or the influence that public playgrounds can have in the development of the cities providing environments of development for the children. Thus, the information obtained through this study could be of great interest in providing theoretical foundations in future action programs aimed at involving families in the sustainable development of cities.
The objective of this work was to examine the perceptions of adults responsible for the care of children in their leisure time about the contribution of public playgrounds to motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction in children, analyzing these perceptions according to sex, age, educational level, and level of involvement in the child’s education of the participants. To our knowledge, this is the first study analyzing all these factors in a large sample of adults responsible for the care of children in their leisure time. The hypothesis was that the majority of adults responsible for the care of children in their leisure time would have positive perceptions about the contribution of public playgrounds to motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction in children, and that there would be significant differences according to sex, age, educational level, and level of involvement in the child’s education of the participants.

2. Methods

2.1. Participants

The sample consisted of 1019 adults responsible for the care of children in their leisure time in Albacete (Spain). This city was chosen because of the ease of access to the sample. In order to ensure a representative sample, the evaluation was carried out on the 41 existing parks in the city of Albacete (Spain): 1. De la Cruz; 2. Carretas-Huerta de Marzo; 3. Parque Abelardo Sánchez; 4. Plaza Antonio Andújar; 5. Plaza de las Carretas; 6. Plaza de Villacerrada; 7. Plaza Depósito del Sol; 8. Plaza Jesús de Medinaceli; 9. Ajardinada Seminario; 10. Doctor Marañón; 11. Fernando Poo; 12. Ismael Belmonte; 13. Jardín Barrio la Unión; 14. Plaza de Miguel Ángel Blanco; 15. Plaza Dr. Ferrandis; 16. Residencial el Jardín; 17. Vereda de Jaén I; 18. Vereda de Jaén II; 19. Ajardinada Apr-2; 20. Ajardinada Calle Doctor Barraquer; 21. Hospital; 22. Parque Sur; 23. Sepulcro Bolera; 24. Hermanos Falcó; 25. Universidad; 26. Industria; 27. San Antonio Abad; 28. Polígono San Antón; 29. La estrella; 30. La milagrosa; 31. Fiesta del Árbol; 32. Vía Verde; 33. Virgen del Pilar; 34. Plaza Maestro Checa; 35. Plaza del Pelibayo; 36. Anguijes; 37. Cuasiermas; 38. Argamasón; 39. Campillo de las Doblas; 40. Cerrolobo; 41. Salobral.
A total of 25 adults who were in charge of at least one child were selected randomly (simple random sampling) within each park. The distribution of the sample according to sex, age, and educational level is presented in Table 1.
For the elaboration of this work, a quantitative methodology was followed in order to verify the installation of play areas such as playgrounds, and a simple survey format was used to facilitate a proper analysis of all the variables included. All participants signed written informed consent, where the objective and the confidentiality of this study were explained. Furthermore, this research was approved by the Ethics Committee of the University of Castilla-La Mancha (UCLM 151-2017).

2.2. Instruments

In order to obtain an objective evaluation of the perception of the families about the influence of the public playgrounds in motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction of children, a Likert scale was created (scale and frequencies of answers presented in Table 2), after a deep analysis of the available information [14,26,27,28,29,30,31]. The scale was composed of five categories: 1. Totally disagree; 2. Somewhat disagree; 3. Neither agree nor disagree; 4. Quite agree; 5. Totally agree. The different elements or areas of interest considered in the scale were:
  • Impact of parks on the social development of children: Measuring the degree in which parents considered that playgrounds contribute to the development of children’s social skills.
  • Impact of parks on the psychological development of children: Measuring the degree in which parents considered that parks contribute to the development of children’s creativity.
  • Impact of parks on motor development and physical health of children: Measuring the degree in which parents considered that parks contribute to the development and improvement of children’s motor and perceptual-motor skills.
  • Impact of parks in reducing the children’s chances of suffering from obesity: Measuring the degree in which parents considered that parks contribute to the reduction of childhood obesity.
Content validation of the scale was performed using expert judgment in order to ensure that the scale contains an adequate and representative sample of items. Moreover, in order to validate the construct and know the reliability of the scale, we proceeded to apply the instrument on a first convenience sample composed of 140 families who were in charge of a child in a park. The exploratory factor analysis applied with varimax rotation identified the existence of a single factor that explained 55.326% of the total variance. The sample adequacy measure of Kaiser-Meyer-Olkin (KMO) showed a value of 0.715; obtaining also the Bartlett’s sphericity test a probability associated with its statistic (χ2 = 941.540; df = 6) of p = 0.000. The confirmatory factor analysis confirmed the existence of a single factor in the scale. The indices obtained showed a good fit to the data model: Comparative fit index (CFI) of 0.995, Tucker-Lewis index (TLI) of 0.985, root mean square error of approximation (RMSEA) of 0.049, standardized root mean square residual (SRMSR) of 0.016, goodness fit index (GFI) of 0.997, adjusted goodness of fit index (AGFI) of 0.983. Finally, due to the high sample size (N = 1019 participants), the calculation of the goodness of fit statistic χ2 was not considered adequate. The reliability analysis using Cronbach’s alpha showed a high internal consistency of the scale (α = 0.931). Good values were also obtained for the composite reliability (CR = 0.833) and for the average variance extracted (AVE = 0.567).
The following descriptive data of participants were also obtained: sex, age, educational level, and level of involvement in the child’s education.

2.3. Data Analysis

Descriptive analysis of frequencies was carried out in order to compute the frequencies obtained in each of the items listed in the scale. Moreover, contingency tables were obtained in order to know the possible impact on the items of the factors gender, age, educational level, and level of involvement in the child’s education of the adults responsible for the care of children in their leisure time (Table 3, Table 4, Table 5 and Table 6). Among the information to be obtained in these contingency tables, rectified standardized residuals were requested in order to identify those cells where there was a significantly higher or lower proportion of cases observed compared with expected cases assuming independence between both variables; these percentages were also obtained by columns in order to know the relative distribution of cases across categories or levels for each factor. Chi-square test was used as a global indicator to test the hypothesis of independence between each item and factor. Finally, in the case of ordinal variables (age group and educational level), Gamma test was applied in order to identify linear associations between each item and ordinal factors. These results were complemented by calculating the effect size: Cohen’s d for Student’s t-test and η2 for ANOVA analysis. The analyses were carried out with the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences 23.0 (SPSS 23.0).

3. Results

Regarding the item referring the development of social skills, 38.8% quite agreed and 40% totally agreed, which supposes a 78.8% of total agreement. With respect to the child’s creativity, 35.8% strongly agreed and 16.4% fully agreed, which means a 52.2% of total agreement. In the development of motor skills, 38% quite agreed and 15.7% fully agreed, which supposes a 53.7% of total agreement. Finally, in the item corresponding to the reduction of obesity, 31.1% quite agreed and 17.7% totally agreed, (i.e., 48.8% of total agreement) (Table 2).
The sex factor (Table 3) exerted a significant impact in favor of women on the item in which the child reduces the chances of obesity: χ2 (4, N = 1016) = 21.28, p <0.01; Somers’ D = 0.007; Cohen’s d = 0.29. In the other items analyzed, the sex factor had not a significant impact: The child develops social skills: χ2 (4, N = 1016) = 5.93, p > 0.05; Somers’ D = 0.002; Cohen’s d = 0.15. The child develops his creativity: χ2 (4, N = 1016) = 3.99, p > 0.05; Somers’ D = 0.001; Cohen’s d = 0.13. The child develops motor skills: χ2 (4, N = 1016) = 0.99, p > 0.05; Somers’ D = 0.000; Cohen’s d = 0.06.
The age factor (Table 4) had a significant impact in favor of those between 30 and 49 years on three of the analyzed items: The child develops social skills: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 17.96, p < 0.05; Somers’ D = −0.015; Cohen’s d = 0.27; the child develops his creativity: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 26.30, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = −0.112; Cohen’s d = 0.32; the child develops motor skills: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 20.98, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = 0.096; Cohen’s d = 0.29. It had not a significant impact on: The child reduces the odds of obesity: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 2.91, p > 0.05; Somers’ D = −0.006; Cohen’s d = 0.11.
The educational level factor (Table 5) had a significant impact in favor of those with a higher educational level on the four items analyzed: The child develops social skills: χ2 (12, N = 1016) = 46.99, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = 0.088; Cohen’s d = 0.143; the child develops his creativity: χ2 (12, N = 1016) = 49.91, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = 0.091; Cohen’s d = 0.44; the child develops motor skills: χ2 (12, N = 1016) = 27.22, p < 0.01; Somers’ D 0.027; Cohen’s d = 0.33; the child reduces the odds of obesity: χ2 (12, N = 1016) = 39.57, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = 0.097; Cohen’s d = 0.39.
The level of involvement factor (Table 6) also had a significant impact in favor of those with a higher involvement on the four items analyzed: The child develops social skills: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 80.19, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = 0.210; Cohen’s d = 0.56; the child develops his creativity: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 24.16, p < 0.01 Somers’ D = 0.033; Cohen’s d = 0.31; the child develops motor skills: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 40.19, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = 0.175; Cohen’s d = 0.40; the child reduces the odds of obesity: χ2 (8, N = 1016) = 35.27, p < 0.01; Somers’ D = 0.142; Cohen’s d = 0.37.
The global scale score that measured the overall impact of playgrounds on children’s development and obesity reduction averaged 3.69 (SD = 0.62). Segmenting this score by sex, men obtained a mean of 3.66 (SD = 0.64) and women mean of 3.70 (SD = 0.64). However, Student’s t-test for independent samples has not yielded evidence of significant differences: t (1014) = −0.997, p > 0.05; Cohen’s d = −0.06.
In the analysis of the scale according to the age factor, people under the age of 30 obtained an average of 3.65 (SD = 0.71), those between 30 and 49 years obtained an average of 3.72 (SD = 0.62), and those who were older than 50 years had a mean value of 3.61 (SD = 3.61). The ANOVA test did not show evidence that the age factor printed significant differences on the scale: F (2.1012) = 0.905, p > 0.05; H2 = 0.002.
The analysis of the scale according to the educational level factor gave the following results: in the group of people without studies an average of 3.50 (SD = 0.59), in the group of people with primary education studies a mean of 3.69 (SD = 0.65), in the group with secondary education studies an average of 3.69 (SD = 0.63) and, finally, in people with university studies an average score of 3.73 (SD = 0.64). The ANOVA test showed that the educational level factor printed significant differences on the scale object of study: F (3.1000) = 3.542, p < 0.05; H2 = 0.011. The post hoc Bonferroni test showed significant differences between those without studies and those with primary education studies (dif = –0.19; p < 0.05); also, between those without studies and those with secondary education (dif = –0.19; p < 0.05); and between those without studies and those with university education (dif = –0.23, p < 0.01).
The analysis of the scale according to the level of involvement yielded the following results: in the group of people with low involvement an average of 3.52 (SD = 0.66), in the people with medium involvement 3.69 (SD = 0.64), and in those with high involvement 3.90 (SD = 0.55). The ANOVA test showed evidence that the level of implication factor printed significant differences on the scale object of study: F (2.1016) = 28.475, p < 0.01; H2 = 0.058. The post hoc Bonferroni test showed significant differences between low involvement individuals and those with medium involvement (dif = –0.16, p <0.01); also, between those with low involvement and those with high involvement (dif = –0.37; p < 0.01); and between those with medium involvement and those with high involvement (dif = –0.21, p < 0.01).

4. Discussion

Regarding the perception of participants on the influence of playgrounds on physical, psychological, and social development of children, they gave playgrounds a main role, especially in the development of social skills. Certainly, playing with other children leads to mutual interactions between children and the development of social skills [32,33]; outdoor games have been considered socially essential for the human development and the welfare of childhood through centuries [33,34,35,36].
Outdoor games also have a significant role in the development of psychological skills such as creativity, as well as the development of motor skills and the prevention of obesity, although there is less agreement among participants in this point. In this sense, many studies mention the potential of children’s games in the development of creativity [37], imagination [29], and motor development [38], as well as in the prevention of problems related to childhood obesity [39] and the promotion of physical activity among children [40].
Families should be especially aware of the importance for education of parks and playgrounds’ facilities. For example, there is general agreement when it comes to accept the government’s proposal to ban smoking at playgrounds as a positive measure. Thus, the role of families in the education of young children outdoor is essential [10].
In the present study, sex was also a relevant factor in the explanation of some of the issues analyzed. According to the scale that shows the perception of participants about the influence of parks and playgrounds on physical, psychological, and social development of children, women tended to be more aware of the physical benefits that playgrounds bring to children, especially regarding the reduction of obesity. Additionally, those between 30 and 49 years, those with a higher educational level and those with a higher level of involvement in the child’s education had more positive perceptions regarding the impact of public playgrounds to motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction in children.
These results should be taken into account because the presence of adults is a factor that increases the performance of physical activity in children [41,42,43]. In addition, the adjoining and centrality of the different areas of playgrounds are determining factors in the increase of physical activity and; therefore, the benefits that it achieves [44]. In short, outdoor parks are crucial for the development of children’s physical activity [45,46]. As Scott [47] states, outdoor games help children grow, and this is why the results of the present study should be taken in consideration to foster the use of public playgrounds in all sectors of population.
The main strengths of this study were the large representative sample and the use of a valid and reliable instrument. However, the results of this study should be considered within its limitations. Only participants from Albacete (Spain) were measured and most participants were females. Therefore, future studies should analyze samples from other regions and with a sex distribution more homogeneous.

5. Conclusion

Most participants agreed with the positive contribution of public playgrounds to social skills, motor skills, creativity, and obesity reduction in children. Women, those between 30 and 49 years, those with a higher educational level, and those with a higher level of involvement in the child’s education had more positive perceptions regarding the impact of public playgrounds to motor, social, and creative development and obesity reduction in children. These results should be taken in consideration to foster the use of public playgrounds in all sectors of population.

Author Contributions

P.G.M., M.M.L., A.P.A., L.S., J.V.C., T.V.B., R.M.L. and G.F.L.S. conceived and designed the study, analyzed the data and wrote the paper.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflicts of interest.

References

  1. Arias, F.; Caivano, F.; Calvo, B.; Fallon, C.; Gaitán, L.; Gómez, L.; Miret, E.; Tonucci, F.; Trilla, J.; van Loo, M.; et al. I Encuentro “La ciudad de los niños” (I Encounter “City of children”); Acción Educativa: Madrid, Spain, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  2. Cabanellas, I.; Eslaba, C. Territorios de la infancia: Diálogos entre arquitectura y pedagogía (Childhood territories: Dialogues between architecture and pedagogy); Graó: Barcelona, Spain, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  3. Christensen, P. Place, space and knowledge: Children in the village and the city. In Children in the City: Home, Neighbourhood and Community; Christensen, P., O’Brien, M., Eds.; Routledge-Falmer: London, UK, 2003; pp. 13–28. [Google Scholar]
  4. González, J.; Cayuela, D.; López-Mora, C. Prosociality, physical education and emotional intelligence. J. Sport Health Res. 2019, 11, 17–32. [Google Scholar]
  5. López-Sánchez, G.F.; Ibáñez-Ortega, E.; Díaz-Suárez, A. Effects of a program through vigorous-intensity physical activity on blood pressure and heart rate of 8–9 year-old school children. Sport TK 2019, 8, 73–80. [Google Scholar]
  6. Gonzalez-Valero, G.; Zurita-Ortega, F.; Puertas-Molero, P.; Chacon-Cuberos, R.; Espejo, T.; Castro, M. Education for health: Implementation of the Sportfruits program in schoolchildren in Granada. Sport TK 2017, 6, 137–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. López-Sánchez, G.F.; Nicolás-López, J.; Díaz-Suárez, A. Effects of a vigorous physical activity program on blood pressure and heart rate of schoolchildren aged 10-11 years. J. Sport Health Res. 2018, 10, 13–24. [Google Scholar]
  8. UNICEF. Estado mundial de la infancia: Las niñas y los niños en un mundo urbano; UNICEF: Madrid, Spain, 2012. [Google Scholar]
  9. Moore, R.C.; Goltsman, S.M.; Iacofano, D.S. Play for All Guidelines: Planning, Design and Management of Outdoor Play Settings for All Children; MIG Communications: Berkeley, CA, USA, 1992. [Google Scholar]
  10. Tovey, H. Playing Outdoors. SPACES and Places, Risk and Challenge; Open University Press: Maidenhead, UK, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  11. Wellhousen, K. Outdoor Play Every Day: Innovative Play Concepts for Early Childhood; Cengage Learning: Boston, MA, USA, 2002. [Google Scholar]
  12. Fjørtoft, I. Landscape as Playscape: Learning Effects from Playing in a Natural Environment on Motor Development in Children. Ph.D. Thesis, Norwegian University of Sport and Physical Education, Oslo, Norway, 2000. [Google Scholar]
  13. Fjørtoft, I. The Natural Environment as a Playground for Children: The Impact of Outdoor Play Activities in Pre-Primary School Children. Early Child. Educ. J. 2001, 29, 111–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Fjørtoft, I. Landscape as playscape: The effects of natural environments on children’s play and motor development. Child. Youth Environ. 2004, 14, 21–44. [Google Scholar]
  15. Pellegrini, A.D.; Bohn, C.M. The role of recess in children’s cognitive performance and school adjustment. Educ. Res. 2005, 34, 13–19. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Piek, J.P.; Dawson, L.; Smith, L.M.; Gasson, N. The role of early fine and gross motor development on later motor and cognitive ability. Hum. Mov. Sci. 2008, 27, 668–681. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Castelli, D.M.; Hillman, C.H.; Buck, S.M.; Erwin, H.E. Physical fitness and academic achievement in third- and fifth-grade students. J. Sport Exerc. Psychol. 2007, 29, 239–252. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Trawick-Smith, J. Drawing back the lens on play: A frame analysis of young children’s play in Puerto Rico. Early Educ. Dev. 2010, 21, 536–567. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  19. Whitebread, D. Play, metacognition and self-regulation. In Play and Learning in the Early Years; Broadhead, P., Howard, J., Wood, E., Eds.; Sage: London, UK, 2010. [Google Scholar]
  20. Whitebread, D. Developmental Psychology and Early Childhood Education; Sage: London, UK, 2011. [Google Scholar]
  21. Jiménez, C. Educación familiar y alumnos con alto rendimiento. Rev. Española Pedagog. 2006, 64, 273–300. [Google Scholar]
  22. Stevens, I.; Hazte, P. Applying complexity theory to risk in child protection practice. Childhood 2007, 14, 128–144. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Zeiher, H.; Devine, D.; Kjorholt, A.T.; Strandell, H. Flexible Childhood? Exploring Children’s Welfare in Time and Space; University Press of Southern Denmark: Odense, Denmark, 2007. [Google Scholar]
  24. Gaitán, L. Sociología de la infancia; Síntesis: Madrid, Spain, 2006. [Google Scholar]
  25. Gaitán, L. Sociedad, infancia y adolescencia ¿de quién es la dificultad? Rev. Interuniv. Pedagog. Soc. 2010, 17, 29–42. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Farley, T.A.; Meriwether, R.A.; Baker, E.T.; Rice, J.C.; Webber, L.S. Where do the children play? The influence of playground equipment on physical activity of children in free play. J. Phys. Act. Health 2008, 5, 319–331. [Google Scholar]
  27. Grow, H.M.; Saelens, B.E.; Kerr, J.; Durant, N.; Norman, G.; Sallis, J.F. Where are youth active? Roles of proximity, active transport, and built environment. Med. Sci. Sports Exerc. 2008, 40, 2071–2079. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  28. Hart, C.H. Children on Playgrounds: Research Perspectives and Applications; State University of New York Press: Albany, NY, USA, 1993. [Google Scholar]
  29. Pellegrini, A.D. The Role of Play in Human Development; Oxford University Press: Oxford, UK, 2009. [Google Scholar]
  30. Williams, S.T.; Ontai, L.L.; Mastergeorge, A.M. The development of peer interaction in infancy: Exploring the dyadic processes. Soc. Dev. 2010, 19, 348–368. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Young, B.; Robert, D. Play, Physical Activity, & Physical Activity for Young Children; Kendall Hunt Publishing: Dubuque, IA, USA, 2005. [Google Scholar]
  32. Burghardt, M. Defining and recognizing play. In The Oxford Handbook of the Development of Play; Pellegrini, A.D., Nathan, P.E., Eds.; Oxford Library of Psychology: Oxford, UK, 2011; pp. 9–18. [Google Scholar]
  33. Gaskins, S. Pretend play as culturally constructed activity. In The Oxford Handbook of the Development of the Imagination; Taylor, M., Ed.; Oxford Library of Psychology: Oxford, UK, 2013; pp. 224–247. [Google Scholar]
  34. Huizinga, J. Homo Ludens: O jogo como elemento da cultura (Homo Ludens: The Game as a Culture Element); Perspectiva: São Paulo, Brazil, 1971. [Google Scholar]
  35. Smith, E.D.; Lillard, A.S. Play on: Retrospective reports of the persistence of pretend play into middle childhood. J. Cogn. Dev. 2012, 13, 524–549. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Gaskins, S. Children’s daily activities in a Mayan Village: A culturally grounded description. Cross Cult. Res. 2000, 34, 375–389. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Russ, S.W.; Dillon, J.A. Changes in children’s pretend play over two decades. Creat. Res. J. 2011, 23, 330–348. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  38. Westendorp, M.; Hartman, E.; Houwen, S.; Smith, J.; Visscher, C. The relationship between gross motor skills and academic achievement in children with learning disabilities. Res. Dev. Disabil. 2011, 32, 2279–2773. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Gordon-Larsen, P.; Nelson, M.C.; Page, P.; Popkin, B.M. Inequality in the built environment underlies key health disparities in physical activity and obesity. Pediatrics 2006, 117, 417–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  40. Floriani, V.; Kennedy, C. Promotion of Physical Activity in Children. Curr. Opin. Pediatr. 2008, 20, 90–95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  41. Boozanjer Flaes, S.A.M.; Chinapaw, M.J.M.; Koolhaas, C.M.; van Mechelen, W.; Verhagen, E.A.L.M. More children more active: Tailored playgrounds positively affect physical activity levels amongst youth. J. Sci. Med. Sport 2016, 19, 250–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Cohen, D.A.; Han, B.; Derose, K.; Williamson, S.; Marsh, T.; Rudick, J.; McKenzie, T.L. Neighborhood poverty, park use, and park-based physical activity in a Southern California city. Soc. Sci. Med. 2012, 75, 2317–2325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  43. McKenzie, T.L.; Crespo, N.C.; Baquero, B.; Elder, J.P. Leisure-time physical activity in elementary schools: Analysis of contextual conditions. J. Sch. Health 2010, 80, 470–477. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  44. Smith, W.R.; Moore, R.; Cosco, N.; Wesoloski, J.; Danninger, T.; Ward, D.S.; Trost, S.G.; Ries, N. Increasing Physical Activity in Childcare Outdoor Learning Environments: The effect of setting adjacency relative to other built environment and social factors. Environ. Behav. 2016, 48, 550–578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Lindsay, A.C.; Greaney, M.L.; Wallington, S.F.; Mesa, T.; Salas, C.F. A review of early influences on physical activity and sedentary behaviors of preschool-age children in high-income countries. J. Spec. Pediatr. Nurs. 2017, 22, 1–15. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Brown, W.H.; Pfeiffer, K.A.; McIver, K.L.; Dowda, M.; Addy, C.L.; Pate, R.R. Social and environmental factors associated with preschoolers’ non-sedentary physical activity. Child. Dev. 2009, 80, 45–58. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Scott, G.E. Playing with the multiple intelligences: How play helps them grow. Am. J. Play 2012, 4, 19–20. [Google Scholar]
Table
Table 1. Sample characteristics (%).
Table 1. Sample characteristics (%).
SexFemales: 73Males: 27
Age<30 years: 1331–49 years: 67>50 years: 20
Educational levelNo: 10.4Primary: 25Secondary: 32.7University: 31.3
Table
Table 2. Frequency distribution (%) in the different aspects covered.
Table 2. Frequency distribution (%) in the different aspects covered.
1. Totally Disagree2. Somewhat Disagree3. Neither Agree nor Disagree4. Quite Agree5. Totally Agree
The child develops social skills1.23.516.538.840.0
The child develops creativity2.912.832.135.816.4
The child develops motor skills5.414.026.938.015.7
The child reduces the likelihood of obesity4.515.231.531.117.7
Table
Table 3. Contingency table: Sex factor.
Table 3. Contingency table: Sex factor.
Chi SquaredfSigSomers’ DSigCohen’s d
The child develops social skills5.93340.2040.0020.2190.15
The child develops their creativity3.99940.4060.0010.4170.13
The child develops motor skills0.99740.9100.0000.9040.06
The child reduces the likelihood of obesity21.28140.0000.0070.0010.29
Table
Table 4. Contingency table: Age factor.
Table 4. Contingency table: Age factor.
Chi SquaredfSigSomers’ DSigCohen’s d
The child develops social skills17.96680.021−0.0150.5530.27
The child develops their creativity26.30180.001−0.1120.0000.32
The child develops motor skills20.98480.0070.0960.0010.29
The child reduces the likelihood of obesity2.91280.940−0.0060.8210.11
Table
Table 5. Contingency table: Educational level factor.
Table 5. Contingency table: Educational level factor.
Chi SquaredfSigSomers’ DSigCohen’s d
The child develops social skills46.992120.0000.0880.0010.43
The child develops their creativity49.916120.0000.0910.0010.44
The child develops motor skills27.22120.007−0.0270.3050.33
The child reduces the likelihood of obesity39.578120.0000.0970.0000.39
Table
Table 6. Contingency table: Level of involvement factor.
Table 6. Contingency table: Level of involvement factor.
Chi SquaredfSigSomers’ DSigCohen’s d
The child develops social skills80.19880.0000.2100.0000.56
The child develops their creativity24.16980.0020.0330.2520.31
The child develops motor skills40.19680.0000.1750.0000.40
The child reduces the likelihood of obesity35.27980.0000.1420.0000.37

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gil-Madrona, P.; Martínez-López, M.; Prieto-Ayuso, A.; Saraiva, L.; Vecina-Cifuentes, J.; Vicente-Ballesteros, T.; Moratilla-López, R.; López-Sánchez, G.F. Contribution of Public Playgrounds to Motor, Social, and Creative Development and Obesity Reduction in Children. Sustainability 2019, 11, 3787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143787

AMA Style

Gil-Madrona P, Martínez-López M, Prieto-Ayuso A, Saraiva L, Vecina-Cifuentes J, Vicente-Ballesteros T, Moratilla-López R, López-Sánchez GF. Contribution of Public Playgrounds to Motor, Social, and Creative Development and Obesity Reduction in Children. Sustainability. 2019; 11(14):3787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143787

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gil-Madrona, Pedro, María Martínez-López, Alejandro Prieto-Ayuso, Linda Saraiva, Javier Vecina-Cifuentes, Tomás Vicente-Ballesteros, Rafael Moratilla-López, and Guillermo F. López-Sánchez. 2019. "Contribution of Public Playgrounds to Motor, Social, and Creative Development and Obesity Reduction in Children" Sustainability 11, no. 14: 3787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143787

APA Style

Gil-Madrona, P., Martínez-López, M., Prieto-Ayuso, A., Saraiva, L., Vecina-Cifuentes, J., Vicente-Ballesteros, T., Moratilla-López, R., & López-Sánchez, G. F. (2019). Contribution of Public Playgrounds to Motor, Social, and Creative Development and Obesity Reduction in Children. Sustainability, 11(14), 3787. https://doi.org/10.3390/su11143787

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop