Worth a Thousand Words: A Biopsychosocial Perspective on Symbolic Play in Children’s Learning
Irene Zhang
Reflect on your favourite childhood memory—mixing magical potions with sticks, leaves, and dirt in a tree trunk cauldron, or perhaps piloting a cardboard box as a spaceship soaring through the stars. For many, childhood was a series of symbolic play marked by boundless imagination, exploration, and curiosity. Under the umbrella terms of symbolic and abstract thinking, symbolic play (SP) is a process that involves using objects, actions, or ideas to represent something beyond their literal function or meaning. Drawing on cognitive, motor, language, and social skills, SP helps a child make sense of the world at large.
The proposal of SP can be traced back to Jean Piaget’s renowned Theory of Cognitive Development, consisting of four developmental stages (Piaget, 1952). The emergence of symbolic thought is the leading characteristic of the preoperational stage for children aged two to seven years old. Since Piaget, the temporal and neural origins of SP have been studied extensively. In fact, modern research has found that characteristics of SP can arise as early as eight months of age, when children actively explore objects through physical actions (California Department of Education, 2024). At eighteen months, object permanence is established, and there is less reliance on physical manipulation. Children begin to use one object to represent another object, such as using a banana as a phone, marking the beginning of SP. At thirty-six months, complex SP consisting of multiple steps, roles, and an overall plan is formed (California Department of Education, 2024). Within the next few years, more detailed scenarios, such as imaginary friends or storytelling, emerge as children grasp the Theory of Mind, the ability to attribute mental states to others with the awareness that they can differ from one’s own, and recognize symbolic representation as separate from reality (Malik & Marwaha, 2023).
From a biological perspective, one brain structure consistently linked to abstract thinking is the rostral prefrontal cortex (RPFC). The RPFC is a broad region associated with the retrieval, maintenance, manipulation, and integration of stimulus-independent thoughts (Dumontheil, 2014). Its relatively low cell density and high dendritic spine density per cell suggest increased input integration and connections to other brain regions. Magnetic resonance imaging shows prolonged structural development of the RPFC during adolescence, making it one of the last brain areas to fully mature (Dumontheil, 2014).
Engaging in symbolic play may even hold greater benefits for cognitive development compared to other learning methods. Rooted in cultural, historical, and social contexts, play has often been viewed in contrast to learning. Play, with its unstructured and often self-initiated nature, directly opposed learning, which entailed rigid, teacher-directed efforts to maximize knowledge. Despite prior conventional beliefs that play and learning could not coexist, research now strongly supports the integration of play in various educational settings. Such studies introduce the term “playful learning” (Zosh et al., 2022). Playful learning boasts a plethora of developmental benefits. By leveraging children’s natural curiosity and enabling autonomy, it encourages experimentation, problem-solving, and engagement with others (Zosh et al., 2022).
Accordingly, research has pointed to additional advantages of SP compared to non-symbolic, functional play (FP), where objects are used as intended. A study comparing informational exchange between 52 pairs of 24-month-old infants and their caregivers in SP versus FP interactions coded over 11,000 verbal remarks by epistemic stance (ES, the speaker’s understanding regarding a statement), and found different results across the two play settings (Creaghe & Kidd, 2022). During SP, children had the superior ES and were significantly more knowledgeable speakers and recipients. Conversely, during FP, the caregivers demonstrated superior ES. Most notably, the study revealed that caregivers adopted different roles in each setting. In SP contexts, they became inquisitive playmates, often asking questions to encourage infant interaction and self-navigation. In FP, they became the teacher and relied on imperatives to maintain control over behaviour. As such, it turned out that the abstract nature of SP promoted equity in communication so that the infants became the “co-constructors of meaning”. The children were drawn to deeper engagement with others as interactions became a “cooperative meeting of the minds” between the child and their playmate (Creaghe & Kidd, 2022).
In fact, studies have found that the mere practice of SP promotes language acquisition. Due to the shared understanding required in exchanges of SP, there is an increased proportion of questions and conversational turns, allowing children to grow their vocabulary (Quinn et al., 2018). This lays the foundation for later communicative success as they make, assign, and express meaning to ambiguity. Indeed, facilitating situations where children are not treated as “empty vessels receiving information” (Zosh et al., 2022) but rather as pioneers of their own learning provides an enriched basis for development.
Further, studies support SP as an early intervention for developmental delays. A recent case study of a 22-month-old at developmental risk showed SP intervention reversed concerning social behaviours and improved overall development (Shpendi Şirin, 2025). This can be especially valuable for children who inherently struggle with social and behavioural impairments. Ongoing research explores SP as a dynamic approach for neurodevelopmental disorders like Autism Spectrum Disorder and Down Syndrome.
While SP continues to show promise in developmental and therapeutic avenues, its changing prevalence raises pressing concerns. In today’s rapidly evolving world, the dwindling presence of SP in childhood poses an entirely new threat to current and future generations. This decline in play has progressed alongside a rise in mental health issues. In 2021, the American Academy of Pediatrics, alongside other leading child health organizations, jointly declared a National State of Emergency in Child and Adolescent Mental Health. Increased anxiety and depression scores paired with staggering suicide rates mark the mental health crisis that has exploded over the last half-century, heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic and rising racial inequities. Psychologist Peter Gray, whose work at Boston College focuses on the role of play in learning, development, and education, claims a “causal link” between the decline in play and the rise in mental health diagnoses (Gray, 2011). The clear decline in play can be attributed to increased technology accessibility, media-aggravated safety concerns, and shifting societal beliefs favoring helicopter parenting and overprotection (Gray, 2011; Gopal Singh Charan et al., 2024). Especially for outdoor play, addictive entertainment algorithms and increased academic pressures are luring children indoors and reducing their time spent outside. Children have worsening cardiovascular health and motor skills and lack skills evoked from the natural environment, from creativity to conflict resolution. Play functions as a means to develop important life skills like decision-making and self-regulation and allows for the experience of joy, which, alongside numerous other benefits, promotes strong mental health and resilience. As such, SP is indispensable to proper human development, and leveraging resources to create optimal environments for play to thrive is imperative.
A nod to humankind’s hunter-gatherer origins, play marks a key part of childhood that paves the way for successful adulthood. However, today, children are growing up in a very different world from that of our ancestors. The digital age, marked by a loneliness epidemic and mental health crisis, presents entirely new challenges. Increasing the advocacy and funding for symbolic play in daily settings is now more essential than ever. Educators, government officials, parents, and all individuals must push for the broader implementation of SP into educational, community, and therapeutic spaces. Through collective efforts, society, as a whole, can shift the narrative of play versus learning to create an essential harmony between the two.
About the Author
Irene Zhang is a student at Elgin Park Secondary School in Surrey, British Columbia.
References
The proposal of SP can be traced back to Jean Piaget’s renowned Theory of Cognitive Development, consisting of four developmental stages (Piaget, 1952). The emergence of symbolic thought is the leading characteristic of the preoperational stage for children aged two to seven years old. Since Piaget, the temporal and neural origins of SP have been studied extensively. In fact, modern research has found that characteristics of SP can arise as early as eight months of age, when children actively explore objects through physical actions (California Department of Education, 2024). At eighteen months, object permanence is established, and there is less reliance on physical manipulation. Children begin to use one object to represent another object, such as using a banana as a phone, marking the beginning of SP. At thirty-six months, complex SP consisting of multiple steps, roles, and an overall plan is formed (California Department of Education, 2024). Within the next few years, more detailed scenarios, such as imaginary friends or storytelling, emerge as children grasp the Theory of Mind, the ability to attribute mental states to others with the awareness that they can differ from one’s own, and recognize symbolic representation as separate from reality (Malik & Marwaha, 2023).
From a biological perspective, one brain structure consistently linked to abstract thinking is the rostral prefrontal cortex (RPFC). The RPFC is a broad region associated with the retrieval, maintenance, manipulation, and integration of stimulus-independent thoughts (Dumontheil, 2014). Its relatively low cell density and high dendritic spine density per cell suggest increased input integration and connections to other brain regions. Magnetic resonance imaging shows prolonged structural development of the RPFC during adolescence, making it one of the last brain areas to fully mature (Dumontheil, 2014).
Engaging in symbolic play may even hold greater benefits for cognitive development compared to other learning methods. Rooted in cultural, historical, and social contexts, play has often been viewed in contrast to learning. Play, with its unstructured and often self-initiated nature, directly opposed learning, which entailed rigid, teacher-directed efforts to maximize knowledge. Despite prior conventional beliefs that play and learning could not coexist, research now strongly supports the integration of play in various educational settings. Such studies introduce the term “playful learning” (Zosh et al., 2022). Playful learning boasts a plethora of developmental benefits. By leveraging children’s natural curiosity and enabling autonomy, it encourages experimentation, problem-solving, and engagement with others (Zosh et al., 2022).
Accordingly, research has pointed to additional advantages of SP compared to non-symbolic, functional play (FP), where objects are used as intended. A study comparing informational exchange between 52 pairs of 24-month-old infants and their caregivers in SP versus FP interactions coded over 11,000 verbal remarks by epistemic stance (ES, the speaker’s understanding regarding a statement), and found different results across the two play settings (Creaghe & Kidd, 2022). During SP, children had the superior ES and were significantly more knowledgeable speakers and recipients. Conversely, during FP, the caregivers demonstrated superior ES. Most notably, the study revealed that caregivers adopted different roles in each setting. In SP contexts, they became inquisitive playmates, often asking questions to encourage infant interaction and self-navigation. In FP, they became the teacher and relied on imperatives to maintain control over behaviour. As such, it turned out that the abstract nature of SP promoted equity in communication so that the infants became the “co-constructors of meaning”. The children were drawn to deeper engagement with others as interactions became a “cooperative meeting of the minds” between the child and their playmate (Creaghe & Kidd, 2022).
In fact, studies have found that the mere practice of SP promotes language acquisition. Due to the shared understanding required in exchanges of SP, there is an increased proportion of questions and conversational turns, allowing children to grow their vocabulary (Quinn et al., 2018). This lays the foundation for later communicative success as they make, assign, and express meaning to ambiguity. Indeed, facilitating situations where children are not treated as “empty vessels receiving information” (Zosh et al., 2022) but rather as pioneers of their own learning provides an enriched basis for development.
Further, studies support SP as an early intervention for developmental delays. A recent case study of a 22-month-old at developmental risk showed SP intervention reversed concerning social behaviours and improved overall development (Shpendi Şirin, 2025). This can be especially valuable for children who inherently struggle with social and behavioural impairments. Ongoing research explores SP as a dynamic approach for neurodevelopmental disorders like Autism Spectrum Disorder and Down Syndrome.
While SP continues to show promise in developmental and therapeutic avenues, its changing prevalence raises pressing concerns. In today’s rapidly evolving world, the dwindling presence of SP in childhood poses an entirely new threat to current and future generations. This decline in play has progressed alongside a rise in mental health issues. In 2021, the American Academy of Pediatrics, alongside other leading child health organizations, jointly declared a National State of Emergency in Child and Adolescent Mental Health. Increased anxiety and depression scores paired with staggering suicide rates mark the mental health crisis that has exploded over the last half-century, heightened by the COVID-19 pandemic and rising racial inequities. Psychologist Peter Gray, whose work at Boston College focuses on the role of play in learning, development, and education, claims a “causal link” between the decline in play and the rise in mental health diagnoses (Gray, 2011). The clear decline in play can be attributed to increased technology accessibility, media-aggravated safety concerns, and shifting societal beliefs favoring helicopter parenting and overprotection (Gray, 2011; Gopal Singh Charan et al., 2024). Especially for outdoor play, addictive entertainment algorithms and increased academic pressures are luring children indoors and reducing their time spent outside. Children have worsening cardiovascular health and motor skills and lack skills evoked from the natural environment, from creativity to conflict resolution. Play functions as a means to develop important life skills like decision-making and self-regulation and allows for the experience of joy, which, alongside numerous other benefits, promotes strong mental health and resilience. As such, SP is indispensable to proper human development, and leveraging resources to create optimal environments for play to thrive is imperative.
A nod to humankind’s hunter-gatherer origins, play marks a key part of childhood that paves the way for successful adulthood. However, today, children are growing up in a very different world from that of our ancestors. The digital age, marked by a loneliness epidemic and mental health crisis, presents entirely new challenges. Increasing the advocacy and funding for symbolic play in daily settings is now more essential than ever. Educators, government officials, parents, and all individuals must push for the broader implementation of SP into educational, community, and therapeutic spaces. Through collective efforts, society, as a whole, can shift the narrative of play versus learning to create an essential harmony between the two.
About the Author
Irene Zhang is a student at Elgin Park Secondary School in Surrey, British Columbia.
References
- American Academy of Pediatrics. (2021, October 19). AAP-AACAP-CHA Declaration of a National Emergency in Child and Adolescent Mental Health. Www.aap.org; American Academy of Pediatrics. https://www.aap.org/en/advocacy/child-and-adolescent-healthy-mental-development/aap-aacap-cha-declaration-of-a-national-emergency-in-child-and-adolescent-mental-health/
- California Department of Education. (2024, December 17). Foundation: Symbolic Play - Child Development (CA Dept of Education). Ca.gov. https://www.cde.ca.gov/sp/cd/re/itf09cogdevfdsym.asp
- Creaghe, N., & Kidd, E. (2022). Symbolic play as a zone of proximal development: An analysis of informational exchange. Social Development, 31(4). https://doi.org/10.1111/sode.12592
- Dumontheil, I. (2014). Development of abstract thinking during childhood and adolescence: The role of rostrolateral prefrontal cortex. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 57–76. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dcn.2014.07.009
- Gopal Singh Charan, Kalia, R., Mandeep Singh Khurana, & Gursharan Singh Narang. (2024). From Screens to Sunshine: Rescuing Children’s Outdoor Playtime in the Digital Era. Journal of Indian Association for Child and Adolescent Mental Health, 20(1). https://doi.org/10.1177/09731342241229845
- Gray, P. (2011). The Decline of Play and the Rise of Psychopathology in Children and Adolescents. https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ985541.pdf
- Malik, F., & Marwaha, R. (2023, April 23). Cognitive Development. National Library of Medicine; StatPearls Publishing. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK537095/
- Quinn, S., Donnelly, S., & Kidd, E. (2018). The relationship between symbolic play and language acquisition: A meta-analytic review. Developmental Review, 49(1), 121–135. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.dr.2018.05.005
- Shpendi Şirin, T. (2025). Kalem Eğitim ve İnsan Bilimleri Dergisi. 15(1), 233–245. https://doi.org/10.23863/kalem.2024.306
- Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. (M. Cook, Trans.). W W Norton & Co.
- Zosh, J. M., Gaudreau, C., Golinkoff, R. M., & Hirsh-Pasek, K. (2022). The power of playful learning in the early childhood setting. NAEYC; National Association for the Education of Young Children. https://www.naeyc.org/resources/pubs/yc/summer2022/power-playful-learning