Hostname: page-component-77f85d65b8-v2srd Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-04-18T12:46:35.200Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

All non-real worlds provide exploration: Evidence from developmental psychology

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2022

Katherine E. Norman Open the ORCID record for Katherine E. Norman [Opens in a new window]  and
Thalia R. Goldstein Open the ORCID record for Thalia R. Goldstein [Opens in a new window]
Katherine E. Norman
Affiliation:
Department of Educational Psychology, University of Wisconsin, Madison, WI 53703, USA knorman4@wisc.edu https://edpsych.education.wisc.edu/staff/norman-katherine/
Thalia R. Goldstein
Affiliation:
Department of Psychology, George Mason University, Fairfax, VA 22030, USA  tgoldste@gmu.edu https://psychology.gmu.edu/people/tgoldste
Get access Rights & Permissions [Opens in a new window]

Abstract

While Dubourg and Baumard argue that predisposition toward exploration draws us to fictional environments, they fail to answer their titular question: “Why Imaginary Worlds?” Research in pretend play, psychological distancing, and theatre shows that being “imaginary” (i.e., any type of unreal, rather than only fantastically unreal) makes exploration of any fictional world profoundly different than that of real-life unfamiliar environments.

Information

Type
Open Peer Commentary
Information
Behavioral and Brain Sciences , Volume 45 , 2022 , e290
Check for updates
Copyright
Copyright © The Author(s), 2022. Published by Cambridge University Press

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

Boland, G. (2013). Role and role distance: The Heathcote/Carroll collaboration that reframed the social context for drama-based learning and teaching. NJ: Drama Australia Journal, 37, 53–64.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Buchsbaum, D., Bridgers, S., Skolnick Weisberg, D., & Gopnik, A. (2012). The power of possibility: Causal learning, counterfactual reasoning, and pretend play. Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 367(1599), 2202–2212.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Carlson, S., Taylor, M., & Levin, G.R. (1998). The influence of culture on pretend play: The case of Mennonite children. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly (1982–), 44(4), 538–565.Google Scholar
Clark, C. D. (1998). Flights of fancy, leaps of faith: Children's myths in contemporary America. University of Chicago Press.Google Scholar
Gaskins, S. (1999). Children's daily lives in a Mayan village: A case study of culturally constructed roles and activities. In Göncü, A. (Ed.), Children's engagement in the world: Sociocultural perspectives (pp. 25–60). Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
Goldstein, T. R., & Lerner, M. D. (2018). Dramatic pretend play games uniquely improve emotional control in young children. Developmental science, 21(4), 1–13.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Haight, W., Wang, X., Fung, H., Williams, K., & Mintz, J. (1999). Universal, developmental, and variable aspects of young children's play: A cross-cultural comparison of pretending at home. Child Development, 70, 1477–1488.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Heathcote, D. (1985). Collected writings. In Johnson, L. & O'Neill, C. (eds.), Dorothy Heathcote: Collected writings on education and drama. (pp. 49–53) Hutchinson and Co.Google Scholar
Hostetler, J. A., & Huntington, G. E. (1971). Children in Amish society: Socialization and community education. Case Studies in Education and Culture Series.Google Scholar
Leslie, A. M. (1987). Pretense and representation: The origins of “theory of mind.” Psychological Review, 94, 412–422.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lew-Levy, S., Boyette, A. H., Crittenden, A. N., Hewlett, B. S., & Lamb, M. E. (2020). Gender-typed and gender-segregated play among Tanzanian Hadza and Congolese BaYaka hunter-gatherer children and adolescents. Child Development, 91(4), 1284–1301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Liberman, N., & Trope, Y. (2014). Traversing psychological distance. Trends in Cognitive Science, 7, 364–369.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Stephan, E. (2007). Psychological distance. Social Psychology: Handbook of Basic Principles, 2, 353–383.Google Scholar
Lillard, A. S., & Taggart, J. (2019). Pretend play and fantasy: What if Montessori was right?. Child Development Perspectives, 13(2), 85–90.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nichols, S., & Stich, S. (2000). A cognitive theory of pretense. Cognition, 74(2), 115–147.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Nichols, S., & Stich, S. (2003). Mindreading: An integrated account of pretense, self- awareness and understanding other minds. Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Pierucci, J. M., O'Brien, C. T., McInnis, M. A., Gilpin, A. T., & Barber, A. B. (2014). Fantasy orientation constructs and related executive function development in preschool: Developmental benefits to executive functions by being a fantasy-oriented child. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 38(1), 62–69.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Rafetseder, E., Cristi-Vargas, R., & Perner, J. (2010). Counterfactual reasoning: Developing a sense of “nearest possible world”. Child Development, 81(1), 376–389.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Semin, G. R., & Smith, E. R. (1999). Revisiting the past and back to the future: Memory systems and the linguistic representation of social events. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76(6), 877.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sutherland, S. L., & Friedman, O. (2012). Preschoolers acquire general knowledge by sharing in pretense. Child Development, 83(3), 1064–1071.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Sutherland, S. L., & Friedman, O. (2013). Just pretending can be really learning: Children use pretend play as a source for acquiring generic knowledge. Developmental Psychology, 49(9), 1660.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Taggart, J., Becker, I., Rauen, J., Al Kallas, H., & Lillard, A. S. (2020). What shall we do: Pretend or real? Preschoolers’ choices and parents’ perceptions. Journal of Cognition and Development, 21(2), 261–281.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Taggart, J., Heise, M. J., & Lillard, A. S. (2018). The real thing: Preschoolers prefer actual activities to pretend ones. Developmental Science, 21(3), e12582.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Thibodeau, R. B., Gilpin, A. T., Brown, M. M., & Meyer, B. A. (2016). The effects of fantastical pretend-play on the development of executive functions: An intervention study. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 145, 120–138.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Waldron, D. (2005). Role-playing games and the Christian right: Community formation in response to a moral panic. The Journal of Religion and Popular Culture, 9(1), 3–3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Weisberg, D. S. (2015). Pretend play. Wiley Interdisciplinary Reviews: Cognitive Science, 6(3), 249–261.Google ScholarPubMed
Weisberg, D. S., & Gopnik, A. (2013). Pretense, counterfactuals, and Bayesian causal models: Why what is not real really matters. Cognitive Science, 37(7), 1368–1381.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
White, R. E., & Carlson, S. M. (2015). What would Batman do? Self-distancing improves executive function in young children. Developmental Science, 19(3), 419–426.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wyman, E., Rakoczy, H., & Tomasello, M. (2009). Young children understand multiple pretend identities in their object play. British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 27(2), 385–404.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed