Children’s play, learning and development

Abstract

Play in humans, especially in human children, has been written about extensively by psychologists and anthropologists. Play forms are primarily exercise play, rough-and-tumble play, object play, pretend and sociodramatic play. Play behavior can take up an appreciable part of the time budget. There is a spectrum of views on the importance of play in human development, amongst theorists and amongst human societies generally. Different views can be found both historically and cross-culturally, from Spencer’s (1898) description of play as “superfluous and useless exercise”, through to Gaskins, Haight and Lancy (2007), who describe three types of societies with differing prevailing attitudes to play, which they call ‘culturally cultivated play’, ‘culturally accepted play’, and ‘culturally curtailed play’. The ‘play ethos’ (Smith, 1988), or “the realisation that play is essential for normal development has slowly but surely permeated our cultural heritage” (Department of Environment Report, UK, 1973), has greatly influenced the value put on play in much of modern western society, and on the way research has been carried out and reported. I review the history of views on play, and the evidence for developmental functions, as regards various types of children’s play. The evidence comes mainly from anthropological studies, correlational studies, and experimental studies. Three models will be tested against the evidence: that play is epiphenomenal, shows equifinality, or is essential for development. .