Cited by 884Child and Animal Learning DevelopmentEarly Childhood Education and DevelopmentDevelopmental and Educational Neuropsychology

The impact of pretend play on children's development: A review of the evidence

Lillard, Angeline S., Lerner, Matthew D., Hopkins, Emily J., Dore, Rebecca A., Smith, Eric D., Palmquist, Carolyn M.·2013·Psychological Bulletin

Abstract

Pretend play has been claimed to be crucial to children's healthy development. Here we examine evidence for this position versus 2 alternatives: Pretend play is 1 of many routes to positive developments (equifinality), and pretend play is an epiphenomenon of other factors that drive development. Evidence from several domains is considered. For language, narrative, and emotion regulation, the research conducted to date is consistent with all 3 positions but insufficient to draw conclusions. For executive function and social skills, existing research leans against the crucial causal position but is insufficient to differentiate the other 2. For reasoning, equifinality is definitely supported, ruling out a crucially causal position but still leaving open the possibility that pretend play is epiphenomenal. For problem solving, there is no compelling evidence that pretend play helps or is even a correlate. For creativity, intelligence, conservation, and theory of mind, inconsistent correlational results from sound studies and nonreplication with masked experimenters are problematic for a causal position, and some good studies favor an epiphenomenon position in which child, adult, and environment characteristics that go along with play are the true causal agents. We end by considering epiphenomenalism more deeply and discussing implications for preschool settings and further research in this domain. Our take-away message is that existing evidence does not support strong causal clai…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1037/a0029321

Cites

12 of 12 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lillard, A. S., Lerner, M. D., Hopkins, E. J., Dore, R. A., Smith, E. D., & Palmquist, C. M.
Affiliations
University of Virginia (US)
Venue
Psychological Bulletin
Published
2013-01
Volume
139
Issue
1
Pages
1-34
ISSN
  • 0033-2909 (ISSN-L)
  • 1939-1455
OpenAlex
W2146349261
Cited by
884
References
12
Citations by year
2026: 63 · 2025: 78 · 2024: 49 · 2023: 72 · 2022: 87 · 2021: 67 · 2020: 101 · 2019: 64 · 2018: 76 · 2017: 60 · 2016: 58 · 2015: 41 · 2014: 38 · 2013: 29
FWCI
69.56
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Psychological Bulletin (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation (1024293)
  • Brady Education Foundation
  • University of Virginia
  • American Psychological Foundation
  • Jefferson Scholars Foundation
  • American Psychological Association
  • Association for Psychological Science
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Developmental and Educational Psychology › Child and Animal Learning Development
  • Social Sciences › Education › Early Childhood Education and Development
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Neuropsychology and Physiological Psychology › Developmental and Educational Neuropsychology
Keywords
pretend play, child development, equifinality, epiphenomenalism, language development, narrative development, emotion regulation, executive function, social skills, reasoning, problem solving, creativity, intelligence, conservation, theory of mind
MeSH terms
Child Development, Child, Preschool, Creativity, Emotions, Female, Humans, Imagination, Internal-External Control, Language Development, Male, Play and Playthings, Social Behavior, Executive Function, Theory of Mind

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review