Persuasive Toy Friends and Preschoolers: Playtesting IoToys

  • Katriina HeljakkaEmail author
  • Pirita Ihamäki
Part of the Studies in Childhood and Youth book series (SCY)


This chapter conducts an empirical study on the Internet of Toys (IoToys) with preschool-aged children in Finland, focusing on the strategies that contemporary character toymakers use to persuade players to nurture, connect and take part in social play. Four English-speaking IoToys were chosen based on their supposed innovativeness, popularity and availability on at the time of the research (September–October 2017) and were playtested with preschoolers who were 5–6 years of age. The study focuses on the variety of play affordances of the hybrid toys, which are both educational and entertaining, and investigates how these features are employed in play. By studying potential play patterns related to these toys, this study highlights preschoolers’ own responses to the affordances of the chosen IoToys.


Character toys Hybridity IoToys Play patterns Preschoolers 



We wish to express our gratitude to the preschool children and their teachers for participating in and facilitating our group interviews and playtests. This study was partly funded by the Centre of Excellence in Game Culture Studies (decision #312396) research project.


  1. Bleumers, L., Mouws, K., Huyghe, J., van Mechelen, M., Mariën, I., & Zaman, B. (2015). Sensitivity to parental play beliefs and mediation in young children’s hybrid play activities. In Proceedings of IDC (pp. 170–177). Boston, MA: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  2. Cagiltay, K., Kara, N., & Aydin, C. C. (2014). Smart toy based learning. In J. Spector, M. Merrill, J. Elen, & M. Bishop (Eds.), Handbook of research on educational communications and technology (pp. 703–711). New York, NY: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Deterding, C. S. (2016). Make-believe in gameful and playful design. In P. Turner & J. T. Harviainen (Eds.), Digital make-believe (pp. 101–124). Basel: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. D’Hooge, H., & Goldstein, M. (2001). History of the Smart Toy Lab and Intel® Play™ Toys. Intel Technology Journal, Q4, 1–6. Retrieved from
  5. Eberle, S. G. (2015). Epilogue: What’s not play? A meditation. In J. E. Johnson, S. G. Eberle, T. S. Henricks, & D. Kuschner (Eds.), The handbook of the study of play (Vol. I, pp. 489–501). Rochester, NY: Co-published with The Strong.Google Scholar
  6. Goldstein, J. (2012, February). Play in children’s development, health and well-being. Brussels: Toy Industries of Europe Publication (TIE).Google Scholar
  7. Heljakka, K. (2012). Hybridisyys ja pelillistyminen leikkituotteissa De-materiaalisen ja re-materiaalisen rajankäyntiä [Hybridity and gamification in playthings—At the crossroads of de-materialisation and re-materialisation]. In J. Suominen, R. Koskimaa, F. Mäyrä, & R. Turtiainen (Eds.), Pelitutkimuksen vuosikirja (pp. 82–91). Tampere: Tampereen Yliopisto.Google Scholar
  8. Heljakka, K. (2013). Principles of adult play(fulness) in contemporary toy cultures. From wow to flow to glow. Doctoral dissertation. Aalto University publication series, 72/2013.Google Scholar
  9. Heljakka, K. (2016). Strategies of social screen play(ers) across the ecosystem of play: Toys, games and hybrid social play in technologically mediated playscapes. Wider Screen, 1(2). Turku. Retrieved from
  10. Heljakka, K., & Ihamäki, P. (2018). Preschoolers learning with the Internet of Toys: From toy-based edutainment to transmedia literacy., 14(1), 85–102.Google Scholar
  11. Holloway, D., & Green, L. (2016). The Internet of Toys. Communication Research and Practice, 2(4), 506–519. Scholar
  12. Ihamäki, P. & Heljakka, K. (2018, January 3–6). Smart, skilled and connected in the 21st century: Educational promises of the Internet of Toys (IoToys). In Proceedings of Arts, Humanities, Social Science Education Conference, Prince Waikiki Hotel, Honolulu, Hawaii.Google Scholar
  13. Koster, R. (2013). Theory of fun for game design. Sebastopol: O’Reilly Media.Google Scholar
  14. Marsh, J. (2017). The Internet of Toys: A posthuman and multimodal analysis of connected play. Teachers College Record, 119(15), 1–32.Google Scholar
  15. Mayfield, M. I. (2007). Toy libraries, play, and play materials. In D. J. Sluss & O. S. Jarrett (Eds.), Investigating play in the 21st century (pp. 249–258). Lanham, MD: University Press of America.Google Scholar
  16. McLuhan, M. (1987). Understanding media: The extensions of man. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  17. Play It! The Global Toy Magazine. (2013). Evolution, not revolution. Spielwarenmesse International Toy Fair Nürnberg publication 30.1.–4.2.2013.Google Scholar
  18. Ruckenstein, M. (2010). Toying with the world: Children, virtual pets and the value of mobility. Childhood, 17(4), 500–513.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Satyanarayanan, M. (2001). Pervasive computing: Vision and challenges. IEEE Personal Communications. Retrieved from Scholar
  20. Sutton-Smith, B. (1986). Toys as culture. New York, NY: Gardner Press.Google Scholar
  21. Turkle, S., Breazeal, C., Dasté, O., & Scassellati, B. (2006). Encounters with kismet and cog: Children respond to relational artifacts. Digital Media: Transformations in Human Communication, 120.Google Scholar
  22. Tyni, H., Kultima, A., & Mäyrä, F. (2013). Dimensions of hybrid in playful products. In A. Lugmayar, H. Franssila, J. Paavilainen, & H. Kärkkäinen (Eds.), Proceedings of 17th International Academic MindTrek Conference: Making Sense of Converging Media (pp. 237–244). New York: ACM.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© The Author(s) 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.University of TurkuPoriFinland
  2. 2.Prizztech Ltd.PoriFinland

Personalised recommendations