Page 25 - IJSA, Vol. 4, No 1, 2021

International Journal of Science Annals, Vol. 4, No. 1, 2021
рrint ISSN: 2617-2682; online ISSN: 2707-3637; DOI:10.26697/ijsa

Introduction
This article continues a series of studies devoted to ludic during coaching sessions in ludic competence, which are
competence/playfulness and one of its components is part of the curriculum of psychology students in
flirting (Gordienko-Mytrofanova et al., 2021a). H. S. Skovoroda Kharkiv National Pedagogical
We define ludic competence as a system of inner University. Ludic position is a way how individual
resources to which a person turns (in the context of creative adaptation to the reality of their own “Self” and
conflict/difficult interpersonal interaction) in order to to the reality of the “Other”. Ludic position reflects the
balance their personality against external conditions of experience of displaying playfulness/ludic competence
the social environment on the basis of positive emotions, in various standard and non-standard situations, i.e. a
interest and joy, which are frequently expressed behavioral aspect. Thus, acquiring the ludic positions
affectively and accompanied by tension and excitement. implies acquiring behavior patterns.
By inner resources we understand playfulness, an Within our research we are especially interested in the
integral stable personality trait. studies where a close relationship of flirting and
Playfulness as a stable personality trait has been studied playfulness is shown.
by the scientists since 1975 (Barnett, 1990; Playfulness is a subject of active research as a highly
Bowman, 1987; Bundy, 1996; Chapman, 1978; desirable trait in potential long-term mates (Chick et
Csikszentmihalyi, 1975; Groos, 1976; Guitard et al., 2012; Fredrickson, 2003; Gordienko-Mytrofanova
al., 2005; Proyer, 2012; 2017; Proyer & Jehle, 2013; & Kobzieva, 2018; Kobzieva et al., 2019; J. Lauer &
Qian & Yarnal, 2011; Schaefer & Greenberg, 1997; Lauer, 2002; Proyer & Wagner, 2015; Weber &
Shen, 2010; Yue et al., 2016) covering person’s system Ruch, 2012) starting with the studies of Woll (1989),
of personality resources, adaptational potential, etc. and where playfulness is associated with different styles of
first of all it is associated in general with mental well- sexual behavior, certain types of affection and love:
being; coping strategies; social intelligence and in - playfulness as a spontaneous, idiosyncratic “private
particular with “virtual type of communicative game” plays a definite part in establishing positive
competence” (Kobzieva, 2020, p. 38). relationships and settling conflicts and, more broadly,
We determine playfulness as an integral stable tends to stabilize family relationship (Betcher, 1981);
personality trait, which shows as the individual creative - playfulness as an important trait of potential partners
adaptation to the reality of their own “Self” (individual for romantic relationship (J. Lauer & Lauer, 2002;
identity) and to the reality of the “Other” (social Fredrickson, 2003; Weber & Ruch, 2012);
identity): every conflict/difficult situation can be faced - playfulness is an evolutionarily significant
as a challenge rather than a threat. This definition of characteristic when choosing a sexual partner as
playfulness is close to the concept of Guitard et “a highly desirable trait in long-term sexual mates”
al. (2005, p. 19). From this point on the “Other” is (Chick et al., 2012; Proyer & Wagner, 2015).
understood as a subject/subjects of conflict/difficult Certainly, we also considered the studies where flirting
interpersonal interaction. was the subject of research without any connection with
The research of playfulness is carried out by means of playfulness. As a psychological phenomenon flirting
psycholinguistic instruments. and its certain aspects are covered in the works of
The principal stage of the psycholinguistic experiment Bern (2017) as a kind of light game, which implies
included a longitudinal free association test with the presence of a double secret interaction of ego states and
stimulus “playfulness” on the sample of 4,795 in the works of Gangestad (cited by Rodgers, 1999), as
respondents that allowed to verify the components of a negotiation process that takes place after an initial
playfulness and corresponding ludic positions: contribution. Hall (2013) identified 5 styles of flirting;
“sensitivity” (sensitive) – “Empath”; “humour” (funny) Henningsen et al. (2008) determined 6 motives of
– “Real humourist”; “ease” (easy) – “balance-master”; flirting; Watzlawick (1983) defined 30 steps of flirting
“imagination” (imaginative) – “Sculptor”; “flirting” “from the first eye contact to sex”; Givens (1978,
(flirtatious) – “Diplomat”; “impishness” (impish) – p. 346–359) and Whitty (2003, p. 343–344) described
“Frolicsome fellow”; “fugue” (fugue) – “Holy fool” non-verbal cues for flirting.
(Gordienko-Mytrofanova & Kobzieva, 2018; Kobzieva Based on theoretical and empirical studies of the
et al., 2019). scientists mentioned above, the results of
The components of playfulness/ ludic competence are psycholinguistic studies, flirting as an individual scale
defined as “self-motivated abilities” (Raven, 2001), of ludic competence/playfulness was singled out in the
which allow people to achieve personally significant structure of ludic competence questionnaire (LCQ)
goals. In terms of our concept such goal is efficient developed in terms of psycholinguistics by domestic
management of conflicts/problems in the context of psychologists Kobzieva et al. (2019).
interpersonal interaction (Gordienko-Mytrofanova et In the frame of our ludic competence coaching sessions
al., 2021a). we consider flirting as the ability to take attention and
As it is shown above, each of seven “self-motivated get on the right side of somebody of the same or the
abilities” has a corresponding ludic position. The names opposite gender through verbal and non-verbal
of ludic positions are justified both theoretically and communication in order to establish and maintain
empirically (Gordienko-Mytrofanova & mutually beneficial relationships based on the feeling of
Kobzieva, 2018; Kobzieva et al., 2019) and were tested emotional bond; “to promote” Other in the desired

23