The Use of Interactive Toys in Children’s Pretend Play: An Experience Prototyping Approach

2. 1. Experience Prototyping

We used the methodological approach of experience prototyping to explore how interactive technology, which entails an integration of digital advancements and traditional toys, influences children’s representations of objects and symbols, and play. Buchenau and Suri (2000) were the first to suggest that an experience prototype is “any kind of representation, in any medium, that is designed to understand, explore or communicate what it might be like to engage with the product, space or system we are designing.” Experience prototyping is an advantageous methodological instrument because it helps us understand existing experiences and explore the design space of new technology. Researchers can use experience prototyping to understand user interaction with the system in physical, narrative, and interactive contexts; it also allows a researcher to be inspired and confirm or reject ideas based on the quality of experience that the prototype engenders.

2. 2. Experience Prototypes

We developed four types of experience prototypes (Figure 2). In order to augment interactive technology, we considered the many different means by which prototypes can be attached to objects by having adhesiveness, augment virtual images, or be separated from objects. It was also designed to provide audiovisual stimulation through various channels and explore how children incorporate multisensory stimulation. Further, a variety of input methods (e.g., buttons, touchscreens) were used to explore usability challenges and the level of functional complexity that is appropriate for the use of interactive technology in children's play. With regard to the symbolic stimuli that pretend play entails, we employed predetermined and open-ended means of augmentation; this was intended to clarify whether children's pretense was founded on symbolic stimuli or their own subjective interpretations of stimuli. Also, we considered different levels of authoring by which children can personalize symbolic stimuli in desired ways. Four experience prototypes that integrated digital augmentation and tangible toys were used: (1) a drawing application that was installed on a tablet device was used with a connected projector; (2) the Moff Band and an adhesive gel pad; (3) a voice recorder with an adhesive gel pad; and (4) LEDs with coin cells (Table 1).

Figure 2

Types (Left), adhesiveness of the experience prototypes (Middle), and user-study experimental setting (Right)

Table 1

The characteristics of the developed experience prototypes

For the first experience prototype, we installed the children's drawing application on the Microsoft New Surface Pro. The drawing application afforded a straightforward interface that children can easily select colors, draw lines, and erase drawings with fingers. The projector was connected to the tablet device using an HDMI cable, which was fixed to the arm of the adjustable pole system, AutoPole, and it projected children's drawings. The Moff Band is a type of wearable bracelet that sonifies user gestures; we modified it in such a manner that it could be easily affixed to objects. A 2 mm 3D printed frame was used to attach the board to both sides of the adhesive gel pad of the Moff Band. The Moff application was paired with an iPhone 8 to produce a variety of auditory feedback related to everyday sounds, such as motorcycle, animal, fireworks, baseball, etc. Similarly, the recorder prototype used a conventional recorder module and was incorporated into the gel pad using a 3D printed frame. When it was pressed continuously, a beep was emitted to indicate that the recording had commenced; the recorded sound was produced when it was pressed briefly. For the last experience prototype, red, blue, yellow, and white LEDs were connected to a circuit-free coin cell to ensure safety. The LEDs were provided with its lights on, without requiring any additional manipulation of children.

2. 3. User Study

2. 3. 1. Participants

The study sample included parents and children because children may find it difficult to create interactive solutions using unfamiliar technology; therefore, parents were expected to complement their children’s lack of experience with new technology (Kafai, 1999). We focused on children between the ages of 3 and 7 years; by this age, children engage in deep and detailed symbolic thoughts as well as understand and utilize interactive technology. Eight parent-child (i.e., two boys and six girls) dyads were recruited via an email list of parents who reside around Daejeon, South Korea (Table 2; labels for children = C1–C8; labels for parents = P1–P8, mean age of the children = 3.88, SD = 1.13). All participants had a South Korean cultural background. The participated parents had well-educated backgrounds (i.e. having at least a bachelor’s degree) and were highly interested in caring and educating their children. Two groups of two dyads (Group C and F) were required to participate as a single group so that the children's social play could be observed.

Table 2

A profile of the user study participants

3. 1. Utilizing technology to diversify pretense involving the object

The child participants were interested in the multi-sensory stimulation that the experience prototypes provided, and they used it to assign symbolic meanings to the toys. For example, when C1 heard the sound of a magic wand from the Moff Band, which was attached to a wooden brick, she symbolized the brick as a magic wand and narrated a story in which she turned her mother into a frog by casting a magic spell. Some participants not only adopted the stimuli that they were provided but also interpreted interactive technology in a subjective manner. This was possible because several experience prototypes were embedded with open-ended and undetermined symbolic meanings that were subject to interpretation. For example, C6 symbolized LEDs lights as the light of a train on which she rode or the candles that she had blown at her birthday party. Through building diverse symbolic pretenses, children exhibited play themes related to pretenses such as alien play, animal play, fishing play, kitchen play, house-building play, hospital play, police play, car play, and dinosaur play.

Parents positively appraised the capability of digital technology in meeting the diverse interests of children, thereby offering parents a convenient strategy that circumvents their worries about providing playthings to their children. We found that children’s interest in toys changed constantly, and it was hard to anticipate the course of their play. P2 noted, “Children are never bound to a single toy. They always want to explore new playthings though they already have enough toys. All parents have to buy a ton of toys and honestly this brought a financial burden for me.” Digital technology is more likely to interest children than traditional toys. P3 observed, “Typical toys support children to practice specific play. But, these (prototypes) can widen the usage of a limited number of toys for diverse play.”

Figure 3

Exploration of the Moff Band's predetermined stimuli (Left) and actions that express symbolic thoughts (Right)

3. 2. Building pretense based on both symbolic stimulus and appearance

The user study found that children build pretense on an object while considering both the physical appearance of the object and symbolic stimuli of the experience prototypes. When predetermined or open-ended symbolic stimuli evoked imaginative symbols, children showed to utilize objects having the physical appearance that can accompany the symbols. The symbolism and designated roles of most toys are hard to change; however, bars that have an abstract shape can be remodeled into other things (e.g., knife, magic wand, pillar, train) depending on the symbolic stimulation. For example, when C5 and P5 were playing with the Moff Band prototype, which was attached to a wooden stick, C5 said, “Look, this (wooden stick) can be a frying pan. (After change symbolic stimuli to a hammering sound) And now this is a hammer.”

As such, physical appearance is a significant design factor as digital stimuli when developing an interactive toy system. Across both sessions (i.e., with and without experience prototype), children's symbolic pretense was classified into three categories, based on the external characteristics of the physical object, namely, role pretense, tool pretense, and space pretense (Table 4). We defined objects that are physical references for each classified pretense type such as a role toy, tool toy, and space toy. Accordingly, role toys are objects that have a specific role in pretend play (e.g., puppy, baby). Tool toys are used to perform the imitative actions that are associated with symbolic pretenses; stick- and rod-shaped objects belong to this category (e.g., knife, fishing rod, spoon). Space toys spatially contain other toys; therefore, the toy can be used as a house or a fish tank.

Table 4

Three categories of symbolic pretense that emerged in the user study

3. 3. Exhibiting imitative and constructive behaviors

Children actively exhibited imitative behaviors in their symbolic pretend play with toys. Similar to play with traditional toys, imitative behaviors appeared when children were deeply immersed in pretend play or augmenting themselves as if having roles. For example, C5 pretended to catch a fish by using the Moff Band prototype-attached block as a fish rod and turning the insubstantial handle of the rod. It was particularly common for children to use the Moff Band to exhibit imitative behaviors because the prototype provided auditory feedback in response to the gestural input. Thus, the gestural input method could lead children to perform bodily actions and relate these actions with imitative behaviors of imaginative roles.

Also, children demonstrated constructive behaviors by creating toys using materials and other toys. For example, C5 created a train by arranging LEDs and round materials on a long square acrylic plate and said, “I will pretend that this train has different colors in each portion.”This example demonstrates that children use the characteristics of interactive stimuli to actualize their own toys and engage in make-believe play that entails desired symbolic thoughts.

3. 4. Having two sides while utilizing technology in social interaction

Digital technology positively and negatively influenced social pretend play. In social-play environments, shared audiovisual feedback helped gain other children’s attention and facilitated mutual pretend play. For example, C8 was interested in an animal sound that C7 generated while using the experience prototype; subsequently, C8 asked C7, “What is this sound about?” Since the auditory feedback was omnidirectional, it piqued the curiosity of children who were playing independently.

However, there were some concerns that interactive technology could interfere with social play. In particular, excessive engagement with digital technology hindered social interaction. Attention towards touch manipulation and subsequent screen changes detracted children from social play. For example, C7 ignored his mother's encouragement to engage in social play and focused on the screen changes that his touch manipulation yielded. There were conflicts amongst children who tried to simultaneously operate a single device (Figure 4: Right). For example, C3 and C4 cooperatively drew an animated character using the drawing application; however, one of them was annoyed when it was distorted by the manipulation of the other.

Figure 4

Manipulation of the prototype (Left) and simultaneous social conflict and control of the prototype (Right)

3. 5. Parental role as a supportive assistant in social pretend play

Parents played an important role in children’s acceptance and utilization of digital technology in a social context. They encouraged their children to explore the experience prototypes and asked them how they would like to utilize digital technology in their play. For example, P2 complimented C2's use of the voice recorder: “Great job. This is the sound you are producing.”

P5 described his role in social play with C5 as that of “a supportive assistant.” Parents, who became aware of their child’s symbolic use of digital technology, were eager to engage in social play through role distribution and rule organization. For instance, when C5 pretended that the Moff Band prototype-attached block was a fish rod, P5 suggested that C5 was a fisherman and that he was a chef: “Oh, you are a fisherman. I will cook food if you catch a fish. Please catch some fish for me… I am waiting now.” Thus, parents helped their children express their symbolic thoughts and deeply immerse in pretend play. Moreover, they also helped their children recall memories and build mutual pretenses by asking questions and seeking explanations. For example, parents helped their children utilize symbolic stimuli to recall previous experiences of fishing in a river (C3, P3), travelling in a train with one's grandmother (C4, P4), and blowing a candle on one's birthday (C6, P6).

3. 6. Preferring easy and direct ways of functional manipulation

Although adults may find the developed experience prototypes to be user-friendly, children were found to experience several unexpected challenges. For example, they found it difficult to operate a voice recorder that functions differently depending on how long a button is pressed, and a tablet device that entails complex operational steps. Similarly, with regard to the gestural inputs that the Moff Band requires, not all symbolic pretenses could be accompanied by a shaking motion; thus, interactive toys should not solely rely on uniform gestural inputs (P7). Although admitting the benefit of gestural input in eliciting imitative behavior, parents suggested that the one-button manipulation is appropriate for use with children; familiar button control in interactive toys provides immediate audio or visual feedback. Also, when the input and output devices were separated (e.g., the tablet device and projector, the Moff Band and cell phone) children were confused about creating symbolic pretenses. For example, children easily drew with their fingers on the tablet device; however, they could not use these authoring activities to augment and symbolize physical toys.

4. 1. Design physical appearance with abstractness that can accompany diverse symbolic stimuli

As much as digital symbolic stimuli, the physical appearance of the object is a significant; children opt to build pretense on the object that can properly accompany the provided stimuli. In particular, it was found that objects (e.g., bars and blocks that had abstract shapes) were assigned various symbols that were evoked by the symbolic stimuli and consequently this could contribute to diversify children’s pretense and play theme. Based on our classification of children's symbolic pretense into three categories (i.e. role pretense, tool pretense, and space pretense), implication may employ a set of toys with abstract physical appearance in the different categories that can accompany different symbolic pretense on each toy. Abstract-shaped toys with ambiguousness are expected to be versatile as digital stimuli and more opened to interpretation for imagination, contrary to most existing toys with fixed representation and definite symbolic meaning (Figure 5: Left). Consistent with previous notions on children’s interaction in creative play (Kara, Aydin, & Cagiltay, 2014; Price & Rogers, 2004), this approach can encourage children to engage in creative exploration by differentially combining physical toys, digital stimuli, actions, and interactions.

Figure 5

Implications of toys with abstract physical appearance (Left) and wearable device using gestural input method (Right)

4. 2. Design to encourage children to be physically and socially active using gestural input method

The techniques for simple manipulation with immediate feedback were preferred by children and parents. Although other input methods are more complex than the one-button method, they are worth exploring because they have distinct opportunities in children’s pretend play. We found that gestural inputs help children explicitly express their symbolic thoughts through whole-body imitative actions and lead to social play by assigning imaginative roles. The study led us to expect that the design of interactive toy in form of wearable device (e.g. an interactive bracelet) would afford children’s natural body movement as gestural inputs and augment them as if being imaginative characters or things related to symbolic stimuli. As some parents noted that not all symbolic pretenses can be accompanied by a mere shaking motion, the design of gestural input method must rely on the distinct motion of each symbolic stimulus (e.g. a sword associates with a swinging motion and a frying pan fits to a shaking motion; Figure 5: Right). This implication may be especially beneficial for parents and educators who are eager to be a supportive assistant to induce sedentary children being more physically and socially active.

4. 3. Design authoring features of symbolic stimuli as children’s constructive behavior using tangible materials

The possibility of authoring can help children personalize symbolic stimuli; however, digital authoring can be unfamiliar and children could confront difficulty (e.g. drawing visual stimuli and recording own voice as auditory stimuli) to augment and symbolize toys. Thus, to support authoring of digital stimuli, design features should refer to children’s personalization in physical construction using toys and play materials, which is familiar and straightforward. As children build a castle using Lego blocks, implication may afford children to put together desired interactive components and construct interactive toys in their own ways (Figure 6: Left). This block-based interaction in line with constructivism has been attempted in educative applications targeting for children (e.g. coding or storytelling), but is rarely explored in interactive toys as the way to afford children authoring of symbolic stimuli.

Figure 6

Implications of authoring features using tangible construction (Left) and flexible access control (Right)

4. 4. Design for social play considering flexible and respectful access control of shared resources

The user study uncovered two sides of interactive technology: the one that fosters and one that hinders social interaction. Interactive toys and systems for social play can lead to excessive and competitive participation of children which can engender the social conflicts on shared resources (e.g. both tangible resources and digital symbolic stimuli). Therefore, future implication can be addressed by using subtle means of access control of shared resources and collaborative interfaces that require consensus about symbolic stimuli, as in the precedent study on collaborative working of children (Marshall, Fleck, Harris, Rick, Hornecker, Rogers, Yuill, & Dalton, 2009). For example, while some toys and digital stimuli are provided as social resources, others can identify user and only allow personal manipulation of each child (Figure 6: Right). Children can modify a range of the access when they show to reach an agreement on the resources whether to be personal or social (e.g. pushing a button at the same time or giving a voice command together). This access control strategy can assure adequate personal resources that can help children transition from solitary to collaborative play (Rosales, Sayago, & Blat, 2015); thus, they can have enough chance to socially negotiate and make consensus to proceed pretend play in collaborative manner.