In the late 19th century, Groos developed the first theory of play informed by an understanding of evolution by natural selection. The practice theory.
Dear Peter, thanks for this interesting historical essay. You provided supporting evidence to Groos’s Practice Theory. Did you come across any challenging the theory evidence? If so, how would you response to it?
I asked Scholar ChatGPT to provide such evidence. Here is its response (I did not check it for accuracy). What do you think about it?
--------------
### Overview of Challenges to Groos’s Practice Theory
Groos's Practice Theory, which posits that play is a preparatory practice for adult life, has been met with significant challenges, primarily due to its assumptions about the purposive nature of play. Critics argue that play, rather than being a mere rehearsal for future skills, often involves aspects of spontaneity and exploration that Groos’s framework fails to account for. Other critiques highlight that the theory does not sufficiently explain variations in play across cultures and developmental stages or consider the cognitive benefits of play beyond skill acquisition. Moreover, scholars have raised questions about the empirical basis of Groos's assumptions, noting the need for a broader understanding of play that includes psychological and social dimensions.
### Key References on Critiques
1. **Henricks, T. S. (2015)**. *Classic theories of play*. In **The handbook of the study of play**. Routledge.
- This chapter addresses foundational theories, including Groos's, and critiques the concept that play functions solely as a form of practice for adult tasks, suggesting alternative views that emphasize play as an activity of intrinsic motivation and exploration.
2. **Davoudi, S., Shaw, K., Haider, L. J., Quinlan, A. E., Peterson, G. D., Wilkinson, C., ... & others. (2012)**. *Resilience: a bridging concept or a dead end? "Reframing" resilience: challenges for planning theory and practice interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture …* In **Theory & Practice**. Taylor & Francis.
- This paper includes discussions on resilience and adaptability, critiquing practice-based theories like Groos’s, where rigidity in role preparation may undermine adaptability in uncertain environments.
3. **Kelley, J. E. (2018)**. *Introduction: Caution—Children at Play: Investigations of Children's Play in Theory and Literature*. In **Children's Play in Literature**. Taylor & Francis.
- This work examines the historical development of play theories, highlighting limitations in Groos’s approach, especially regarding cultural context and emotional exploration within play activities.
4. **Gross, J. J. (1999)**. *Emotion regulation: Past, present, future*. In **Cognition & Emotion**. Taylor & Francis.
- Gross critiques deterministic aspects of practice theories in development, emphasizing the role of emotional regulation in play, which Groos’s theory overlooks.
5. **Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015)**. *Tackling grand challenges pragmatically: Robust action revisited*. In **Organization Studies**. SAGE Publications.
- This article applies a critical lens to practice theories, arguing that Groos’s view of play as preparatory lacks robustness in addressing contemporary complex challenges in human behavior.
These sources present a range of critiques on Groos’s Practice Theory, focusing on limitations in developmental scope, empirical grounding, and adaptability across contexts.
References:
Henricks, T. S. (2015). Classic theories of play. In J. L. Johnson & S. G. Eberle (Eds.), The Handbook of the Study of Play (Vol. 1, pp. 163-180). Routledge.
Davoudi, S., Shaw, K., Haider, L. J., Quinlan, A. E., Peterson, G. D., Wilkinson, C., & others. (2012). Resilience: a bridging concept or a dead end? “Reframing” resilience: challenges for planning theory and practice interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture system in the Icelandic highlands. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), 299–333. Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.1080/14649357.2012.677124
Kelley, J. E. (2018). Introduction: Caution—Children at Play: Investigations of Children's Play in Theory and Literature. In J. E. Kelley (Ed.), Children’s Play in Literature. Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203702833-1
Gross, J. J. (1999). Emotion regulation: Past, present, future. Cognition and Emotion, 13(5), 551–573. Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.1080/026999399379186
Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015). Tackling grand challenges pragmatically: Robust action revisited. Organization Studies, 36(3), 363–390. SAGE Publications. DOI: 10.1177/0170840614563742
I agree that play is for practice. But why do we need to practice? A kidney doesn't need practice to filter blood. Some muscles grow strong without practice. So why must a predator practice hunting?
I think the answer is that play is for *learning coordination*. If a system can work in isolation, it doesn't need to practice, it can simply develop the features it needs; evolutionarily, genetic assimilation will dominate (the Baldwin effect). But if that system must interact with other complex systems to work, then all of those systems need to understand the emergent consequences of their interactions - and each of them may be influenced in different ways by their environment. So coordination between such complex systems cannot be assimilated by evolution - it must be learned.
But arbitrary interaction between complex systems is also dangerous - one might trigger an explosive positive feedback loop that damages these systems. So interactions during the learning process must be gentle. Imagine if you were born with very strong muscles but poor coordination between them. You would damage yourself very quickly. We are born with weak muscles so we learn to coordinate them before we can make strong movements. In constrast a foal is born with much more ability for strong movement, but it pays a price in developmental constraint - it will never be able to learn the subtly coordinated movements humans can make, or even the complex whole-body coordination of a hunting cat.
The same is true, I think, for social relationships. You can evolve to have rigidly constrained cooperative relationships that do not require learning (like an ant) or you can evolve to have flexible diverse relationships with adaptive roles (like a human) - but the latter requires a propensity for play. Gentleness, small talk and jokes are how we learn to coordinate with each other sensitively.
Hello - I am training in retained reflex integration therapy. We aim to integrate any primitive survival instincts that haven't completed their development journey, and go on to cause a delay. These reflexes should be integrated by movement, and undirected play is the quickest way to develop primitive reflexes into postural reflexes ie survival instinct into purposeful movements. Movement such as crawling helps to develop vision and promotes connection between the left and right hand side of the brain, to then go on to develop good gross motor skills that we may need to hunt animals for food. Children need good gross motor skills before they can develop the fine motor skills for writing etc, and by devaluing play we are hindering their educational skills. I am training in Rhythmic Training Movement International, which was developed by Dr Harald Blomberg, a psychiatrist who worked with children with huge development delays in the Romanian Orphanages in the early 90's. We need movement to integrate reflexes and create connections in the brain, and the children in the orphanages showed what happens when there is no opportunity for this. Reading your post without know any about about the work of Groos makes me think that he recognised the importance of play without the knowledge of the primitive and postural reflexes behind it
This reminds me of how 'play' is described in Andreas Wagner's 2019 book (Life Finds a Way: What Evolution Teaches Us About Creativity).
Great article! Thank you for all your research!
In this section: Application of Groos’s Theory to Humans, in the second paragraph, it says apples to humans (applies).
Dear Peter, thanks for this interesting historical essay. You provided supporting evidence to Groos’s Practice Theory. Did you come across any challenging the theory evidence? If so, how would you response to it?
I asked Scholar ChatGPT to provide such evidence. Here is its response (I did not check it for accuracy). What do you think about it?
--------------
### Overview of Challenges to Groos’s Practice Theory
Groos's Practice Theory, which posits that play is a preparatory practice for adult life, has been met with significant challenges, primarily due to its assumptions about the purposive nature of play. Critics argue that play, rather than being a mere rehearsal for future skills, often involves aspects of spontaneity and exploration that Groos’s framework fails to account for. Other critiques highlight that the theory does not sufficiently explain variations in play across cultures and developmental stages or consider the cognitive benefits of play beyond skill acquisition. Moreover, scholars have raised questions about the empirical basis of Groos's assumptions, noting the need for a broader understanding of play that includes psychological and social dimensions.
### Key References on Critiques
1. **Henricks, T. S. (2015)**. *Classic theories of play*. In **The handbook of the study of play**. Routledge.
- This chapter addresses foundational theories, including Groos's, and critiques the concept that play functions solely as a form of practice for adult tasks, suggesting alternative views that emphasize play as an activity of intrinsic motivation and exploration.
- [Link to text](https://books.google.com/books?id=vAWTBgAAQBAJ)
2. **Davoudi, S., Shaw, K., Haider, L. J., Quinlan, A. E., Peterson, G. D., Wilkinson, C., ... & others. (2012)**. *Resilience: a bridging concept or a dead end? "Reframing" resilience: challenges for planning theory and practice interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture …* In **Theory & Practice**. Taylor & Francis.
- This paper includes discussions on resilience and adaptability, critiquing practice-based theories like Groos’s, where rigidity in role preparation may undermine adaptability in uncertain environments.
- [Link to text](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/14649357.2012.677124)
3. **Kelley, J. E. (2018)**. *Introduction: Caution—Children at Play: Investigations of Children's Play in Theory and Literature*. In **Children's Play in Literature**. Taylor & Francis.
- This work examines the historical development of play theories, highlighting limitations in Groos’s approach, especially regarding cultural context and emotional exploration within play activities.
- [Link to text](https://www.taylorfrancis.com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9780203702833-1/introduction-joyce-kelley)
4. **Gross, J. J. (1999)**. *Emotion regulation: Past, present, future*. In **Cognition & Emotion**. Taylor & Francis.
- Gross critiques deterministic aspects of practice theories in development, emphasizing the role of emotional regulation in play, which Groos’s theory overlooks.
- [Link to text](https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/abs/10.1080/026999399379186)
5. **Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015)**. *Tackling grand challenges pragmatically: Robust action revisited*. In **Organization Studies**. SAGE Publications.
- This article applies a critical lens to practice theories, arguing that Groos’s view of play as preparatory lacks robustness in addressing contemporary complex challenges in human behavior.
- [Link to text](https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/0170840614563742)
These sources present a range of critiques on Groos’s Practice Theory, focusing on limitations in developmental scope, empirical grounding, and adaptability across contexts.
References:
Henricks, T. S. (2015). Classic theories of play. In J. L. Johnson & S. G. Eberle (Eds.), The Handbook of the Study of Play (Vol. 1, pp. 163-180). Routledge.
Davoudi, S., Shaw, K., Haider, L. J., Quinlan, A. E., Peterson, G. D., Wilkinson, C., & others. (2012). Resilience: a bridging concept or a dead end? “Reframing” resilience: challenges for planning theory and practice interacting traps: resilience assessment of a pasture system in the Icelandic highlands. Planning Theory & Practice, 13(2), 299–333. Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.1080/14649357.2012.677124
Kelley, J. E. (2018). Introduction: Caution—Children at Play: Investigations of Children's Play in Theory and Literature. In J. E. Kelley (Ed.), Children’s Play in Literature. Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203702833-1
Gross, J. J. (1999). Emotion regulation: Past, present, future. Cognition and Emotion, 13(5), 551–573. Taylor & Francis. DOI: 10.1080/026999399379186
Ferraro, F., Etzion, D., & Gehman, J. (2015). Tackling grand challenges pragmatically: Robust action revisited. Organization Studies, 36(3), 363–390. SAGE Publications. DOI: 10.1177/0170840614563742
I agree that play is for practice. But why do we need to practice? A kidney doesn't need practice to filter blood. Some muscles grow strong without practice. So why must a predator practice hunting?
I think the answer is that play is for *learning coordination*. If a system can work in isolation, it doesn't need to practice, it can simply develop the features it needs; evolutionarily, genetic assimilation will dominate (the Baldwin effect). But if that system must interact with other complex systems to work, then all of those systems need to understand the emergent consequences of their interactions - and each of them may be influenced in different ways by their environment. So coordination between such complex systems cannot be assimilated by evolution - it must be learned.
But arbitrary interaction between complex systems is also dangerous - one might trigger an explosive positive feedback loop that damages these systems. So interactions during the learning process must be gentle. Imagine if you were born with very strong muscles but poor coordination between them. You would damage yourself very quickly. We are born with weak muscles so we learn to coordinate them before we can make strong movements. In constrast a foal is born with much more ability for strong movement, but it pays a price in developmental constraint - it will never be able to learn the subtly coordinated movements humans can make, or even the complex whole-body coordination of a hunting cat.
The same is true, I think, for social relationships. You can evolve to have rigidly constrained cooperative relationships that do not require learning (like an ant) or you can evolve to have flexible diverse relationships with adaptive roles (like a human) - but the latter requires a propensity for play. Gentleness, small talk and jokes are how we learn to coordinate with each other sensitively.
Hello - I am training in retained reflex integration therapy. We aim to integrate any primitive survival instincts that haven't completed their development journey, and go on to cause a delay. These reflexes should be integrated by movement, and undirected play is the quickest way to develop primitive reflexes into postural reflexes ie survival instinct into purposeful movements. Movement such as crawling helps to develop vision and promotes connection between the left and right hand side of the brain, to then go on to develop good gross motor skills that we may need to hunt animals for food. Children need good gross motor skills before they can develop the fine motor skills for writing etc, and by devaluing play we are hindering their educational skills. I am training in Rhythmic Training Movement International, which was developed by Dr Harald Blomberg, a psychiatrist who worked with children with huge development delays in the Romanian Orphanages in the early 90's. We need movement to integrate reflexes and create connections in the brain, and the children in the orphanages showed what happens when there is no opportunity for this. Reading your post without know any about about the work of Groos makes me think that he recognised the importance of play without the knowledge of the primitive and postural reflexes behind it