Toy as a conditional object

The paper presents the review of literature devoted to research of toys. The authors’ focus is on the main function or special characteristics of a toy, that make it a toy. A toy is understood as a specifically playing object which means that it possesses the main characteristic of a play – the discrepancy between real and semantic field, i.e. it possesses conditionality. Conditionality of a play object provokes a person to attribute some meanings to the object i.e. it stimulates him to create imaginary situations. Imagination or creation of an imaginary situation is connected with the inner world, with the personal experience of a player, which a toy can only discover, but not produce. This paper presents research data that show that a toy does not develop a child by itself. For example, it cannot be a source of aggressive behavior or early sexualization, just like it cannot teach kindness and mutual assistance.

1. Gasparova E.M. Rol' sotsial'nogo opyta v igre detei rannego i doshkol'nogo vozrasta [The role of social experience in play of toddlers and preschool children]. Voprosy psikhologii [Issues of psychology], 1984, no. 6, pp. 43–51. (In Russ.; Abstr. in Engl.).
2. Nel'son A. Igra kak oposredovannoe deistvie. Gendernyi aspect [Playing as a Mediated Action. The Gender Aspect]. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie [Psychological Science and Education], 2011, no. 2, pp. 93–101. (In Russ.; Abstr. in Engl.).
3. Smirnova E.O., Ryabkova I.A. Rolevoe zameshchenie v raznykh predmetnykh sredakh [Characteristics of perception by preschoolers of the play in various playing environment]. Voprosy psikhologii [Issues of psychology], 2018, no. 1, pp. 12–20. (In Russ.; Abstr. in Engl.).
4. Smirnova E.O. Sovremennye igrushki: riski i opasnosti (po materialam seminara v tsentre igry i igrushki MGPPU) [Modern Toys: Risks and Dangers (Materials from the Workshop at the MSUPE Center for Play and Toys)]. Kul'turno-istoricheskaya psikhologiya [Cultural-Historical Psychology], 2016, vol. 12, no. 2, pp. 86–89. doi:10.17759/chp.2016120209 (In Russ.; Abstr. in Engl.).
5. Smirnova E.O. et al. Chto vidyat i chego ne vidyat deti v kuklakh Monstr Khai [What children see and don't see in Monster High dolls]. Sovremennoi doshkol'noe obrazovanie. Teoriya i praktika [Preschool education today. Theory and practice], 2016, no. 2, pp. 34–43. (In Russ.; Abstr. in Engl.).
6. El'koninova L.I., Antonova M.V. Spetsifika igry s kukloi Barbi u detei doshkol'nogo vozrasta [Characteristics of preschoolers play with Barbie doll]. Psikhologicheskaya nauka i obrazovanie [Psychological Science and Education], 2002, no. 4, pp. 38–52. (In Russ.).
7. Berg Lars-Erik. Defining the good toy – an interactionistic approach. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.) Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 1. . Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 139–154.
8. Berg Lars-Erik. Toys and play in identity construction for preschool children; a pilot study of older preschool children. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.). Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 2. Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 193–208.
9. Fein G. Pretend Play in Childhood: An Integrative Review. Child Development, 1981, vol. 52, no. 4, pp. 1095–1118. doi:10.2307/1129497
10. Gulden T. Plenteous and limited play, transmedia storytelling-toys in light of individualist and social esthetics. International Journal of Play, 2016, vol. 5, no. 1, pp. 77–92. doi:10.1080/21594937.2016.1147289
11. Hart L.J., Tannock T.M. Young children's play fighting and use of war toys [Elektronnyi resurs]. In Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development, 2013, pp. 1–6. Available at: http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/sites/default/files/textes-experts/en/774/young-childrens-play-fighting-and-use-of-war-toys.pdf (Accessed:02.04.2018).
12. Hellendoorn J., Harinck F.J.H. War toy play as a reflection of family culture. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.) Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 2. Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 245–261.
13. Jenvey V.B. Australian children’s toy and play preferences 1989–1995: Age, gender and contextual influences. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.) Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 1. Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 105–121.
14. Kline S. Toys as media: young males (3-6) acquisition of pro-social play scripts for Rescue Hero action toys. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.) Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 2. Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 209–223.
15. Mareschal D., Tan S.H. The role of context in the categorization of hybrid toy stimuli by 18-month-olds. Infancy, 2008, vol. 13, no. 6, pp. 620-639. doi:10.1080/15250000802458658
16. Møller S.J. Imagination, Playfulness, and Creativity in Children’s Play with Different Toys // American Journal of Play, 2015, vol. 7, no. 3, pp. 322–346.
17. Mouritsen F. «Do children Really need all these toys?» – do adults. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.) Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 2. Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 59–72.
18. Parsons A., Howe N. Superhero toys and boys' physically active and imaginative play. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 2006, vol. 20, no. 4, pp. 287–300. doi: 10.1080/02568540609594568
19. Rassmussen T.H. The virtual world of toys – playing with toys in a Danish preschool. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.) Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 2. Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 47–57.
20. Retter H. Evaluation of toys today – against the background of contemporary changes in society and socialization. In Lars-Erik Berg, Anders Nelson, Kristen Svensson (Eds.) Toys as communication: Toy research in the late twentieth century. Part 2. Stockholm: SITREC, 2003, pp. 171–179.
21. Rubin K.H., Howe N. Toys and play behaviors: An overview. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 1985, vol. 5, no. 3, pp. 1–10. doi:10.1177/027112148500500302
22. Singer J.L. Imaginative play and adaptive development. In J.H. Goldstein (Ed.) Toys, play and child development, New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp. 6–26.
23. Singer D.G., Singer J.L. The house of make-believe: Children’s play and the developing imagination. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press, 1990, 346 p.
24. Sherman A., Zurbriggen E.L. «Boys can be anything»: Effect of Barbie play on girls’ career cognitions. Sex Roles, 2014, vol. 70, no. 5–6, pp. 195–208. doi:10.1007/s11199-014-0347-y
25. Shoheta C., Klein P.S. Effects of variations in toy presentation on social behaviour of infants and toddlers in childcare. Early Child Development and Care, 2010, vol. 180, no. 6, pp. 823–834. doi:10.1080/03004430802460997
26. Smith P. The war play debate. In J.H. Goldstein (Ed.) Toys, play and child development. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp. 6–26.
27. Sutton-Smith B. Play and ambiguity. Harvard University Press, 2009, 288 p.
28. Dauch C. et al. The influence of the number of toys in the environment on toddlers’ play. Infant Behavior and Development, 2018, vol. 50, February, pp. 78–87. doi:10.1016/j.infbeh.2017.11.005
29. Trawick-Smith J., Russell H., Swaminathan S. Measuring the effects of toys on the problem-solving, creative and social behaviours of preschool children. Early Child Development and Care, 2011, vol. 181, no. 7, pp. 909–927. doi:10.1080/03004430.2010.503892
30. Wegener-Spӧhring G. War toys and aggressive play scenes. In J.H. Goldstein (Ed.) Toys, play and child development. New York: Cambridge University Press, 1994, pp. 6–26.