The European Educational Researcher

Same Toy, Different Play: Investigating Adults’ Ratings of the Cognitive Benefits of Stereotypically Gendered Toys

Nicola Katharina Kolb 1 * ,
Frank Niklas 2,
Matthias Stadler 1
1 Institut für Didaktik und Ausbildungsforschung in der Medizin, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany2 Department of Psychology, Ludwig-Maximilians-Universität München, Munich, Germany* Corresponding Author
Download PDF
The European Educational Researcher, Volume 9, Issue 1, February 2026, pp. 37-54
OPEN ACCESS VIEWS: 11 DOWNLOADS: 8 Publication date: 15 Feb 2026
ABSTRACT
Gender-stereotype toys play a crucial role in early childhood development, offering opportunities for learning and skill-building, in specific cognitive skills. This study examines how adults perceive the cognitive skills promoted by gender-stereotyped toys and explores whether these perceptions align with traditional gender norms. Using an online survey, 176 participants (age from 18 to 94) evaluated toys previously classified as boys’, girls’, or gender-neutral based on their potential to foster seven cognitive skills: assertiveness, creativity, mathematical skills, spatial reasoning, social behavior, technical skills, and verbal skills. Toys were classified based on previous research and established criteria. The results revealed significant differences in adults’ subjective ratings. Boys’ toys were associated with assertiveness and technical skills, while girls’ toys were linked to creativity, social behavior, and verbal skills. However, no significant differences were found for mathematical skills or spatial reasoning, suggesting potential shifts in gendered perceptions. The study highlights the persistence of gender stereotypes in toy evaluations and emphasizes the importance of providing diverse play opportunities to foster a broad range of cognitive skills in all children. In future studies, the discrepancy between perceptions and actual developmental outcomes should be analyzed in depth, e.g., observing children’s interaction with toys.
KEYWORDS
Childhood Play, Cognitive Development, Cognitive Skills, Gender Norms, Gender-stereotyped Toys, Toy Evaluation.
CITATION (APA)
Kolb, N. K., Niklas, F., & Stadler, M. (2026). Same Toy, Different Play: Investigating Adults’ Ratings of the Cognitive Benefits of Stereotypically Gendered Toys. The European Educational Researcher, 9(1), 37-54. https://doi.org/10.31757/euer.913
REFERENCES
  1. Blakemore, J. E. O., & Centers, R. E. (2005). Characteristics of boys’ and girls’ toys. Sex Roles, 53(9-10), 619–633. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-7729-0
  2. Borde, V. (2020). Das Verhältnis von Spielmitteln und Lernen aus Elternperspektive. In V. Mehringer & W. Waburg (Eds.), Spielzeug, Spiele und Spielen (pp.87–102). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-29933-0_5
  3. Brown, C. S., Biefeld, S. D., & Tam, M. J. (2020). Gender in childhood. Elements in Child Development. https://doi.org/10.1017/9781108874281
  4. Casey, B. M., Andrews, N., Schindler, H., Kersh, J. E., Samper, A., & Copley, J. (2008). The development of spatial skills through interventions involving block building activities. Cognition and Instruction, 26(3), 269–309. https://doi.org/10.1080/07370000802177177
  5. Dorie, B., Jones, T., Pollock, M. C., & Cardella, M. (2014). Parents as critical influence: Insights from five different studies. School of Engineering Education Graduate Student Series. https://doi.org/10.18260/1-2--22901
  6. Findlay, L. C., Girardi, A., & Coplan, R. J. (2006). Links between empathy, social behavior, and social understanding in early childhood. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 21(3), 347–359. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2006.07.009
  7. Francis, B. (2010). Gender, toys and learning. Oxford Review of Education, 36(3), 325–344. https://doi.org/10.1080/03054981003732278
  8. Galotti, K. M. (2017). Cognitive development: Infancy through adolescence (2.th ed.). Sage.
  9. Halpern, D. F. (2004). A cognitive-process taxonomy for sex differences in cognitive abilities. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 13(4), 135–139. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.0963-7214.2004.00292.x
  10. Halpern, D. F. (2012). Sex differences in cognitive abilities (4. ed.). Psychology Press.
  11. Hassett, J. M., Siebert, E. R., & Wallen, K. (2008). Sex differences in rhesus monkey toy preferences parallel those of children. Hormones and Behavior, 54(3), 359–364. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2008.03.008
  12. Hedges, L. V., & Nowell, A. (1995). Sex differences in mental test scores, variability, and numbers of high-scoring individuals. Science, 269(5220), 41–45. https://doi.org/10.1126/science.7604277
  13. Hines, M., & Alexander, G. M. (2008). Monkeys, girls, boys and toys: A confirmation Letter regarding “Sex differences in toy preferences: Striking parallels between monkeys and humans”. Hormones and Behavior, 54(3), 478-479. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.yhbeh.2008.05.012
  14. The jamovi project. (2019). jamovi. (Version 1.1) [Computer Software]. Retrieved from https://www.jamovi.org/
  15. Jirout, J. J., & Newcombe, N. S. (2015). Building blocks for developing spatial skills: Evidence from a large, representative U.S. sample. Psychological Science, 26(3), 302–310. https://doi.org/10.1177/0956797614563338
  16. Keppner, M. (2015). Die Spielsache im Spannungsfeld zwischen Spielmittel und Spielware: das kindliche Spiel als Herausforderung im 21. Jahrhundert: eine pädagogische Untersuchung. Internationale Hochschulschriften: Vol. 612. Waxmann.
  17. Lai, N.K., Ang, T. F., Por, L. Y., & Liew, C. S. (2018). The impact of play on child development - a literature review. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26(5), 625–643. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2018.1522479
  18. Leiner, D. J. (2019). SoSci Survey (Version 3.2.27) [Computer software]. Available at https://www.soscisurvey.de
  19. Levine, S. C., Ratliff, K. R., Huttenlocher, J., & Cannon, J. (2012). Early puzzle play: A predictor of preschoolers' spatial transformation skill. Developmental Psychology, 48(2), 530–542. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0025913
  20. Li, R. Y. H., & Wong, W.I. (2016). Gender-typed play and social abilities in boys and Girls: Are they related? Sex Roles, 74, 399-410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-016-0580-7
  21. Liben, L. S., Schroeder, K. M., Borriello, G. A., & Weisgram, E. S. (2018). Cognitive consequences of gendered toy play. In E. S. Weisgram & L. M. Dinella (Eds.), Gender typing of children’s toys: How early play experiences impact development (First Edition, pp. 213–255). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000077-011
  22. Master, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Cheryan, S. (2021). Gender stereotypes about interests start early and cause gender disparities in computer science and engineering. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 118(48). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.2100030118
  23. Mehringer, V., & Waburg, W. (2020). Das Projekt SAKEF – Theoretische und konzeptionelle Überlegungen zur Spielzeugbewertung und Spielzeugauswahl. In V. Mehringer & W. Waburg (Eds.), Spielzeug, Spiele und Spielen: Aktuelle Studien und Konzepte (pp.15–36). Springer VS. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-658-29933-0_2
  24. Mieskes, H. (1974). Spielmittel recht verstanden, richtig gewählt, gut genutzt: eine Anleitung. Augsburger Druck- u. Verlagshaus.
  25. Miller, C. L. (1987). Qualitative differences among gender-stereotyped toys: Implications for cognitive and social development in girls and boys. Sex Roles, 16(9-10), 473–487. https://doi.org/10.1007/bf00292482
  26. Mogel, H. (2008). Psychologie des Kinderspiels: Von den frühesten Spielen bis zum Computerspiel [Psychology of the children‘s play: From the earliest games to computer games] (3., aktualisierte und erweiterte Auflage). Springer.
  27. Morgenthaler, S. K. (2021). Science toys. In D. Bergen (Ed.), The handbook of developmentally appropriate toys (pp. 139–150). Rowman & Littlefield.
  28. Murnen, S. K. (2018). Fashion or action? Gender-stereotyped toys and social behavior. In E. S. Weisgram & L. M. Dinella (Eds.), Gender typing of children’s toys: How early play experiences impact development (First Edition, pp. 189–211). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/0000077-010
  29. Newman, L. S. (1990). Intentional and unintentional memory in young children: Remembering vs. Playing. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 50(2), 243–258. https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-0965(90)90041-6
  30. Pryzgoda, J., & Chrisler, J. C. (2000). Definitions of gender and sex: The subtleties of meaning. Sex Roles, 43(7/8), 553–569. https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1007123617636
  31. Rafat, M. (2022). Social role theory: Stereotyped expectations of gendered toys and its implications in a society. American Journal of Gender and Development Studies, 1(1), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.58425/ajgds.v1i1.81
  32. Retter, H. (1973). Spielzeug, Sozialschicht, Erziehung: Elternbefragung über Spielmittel. Erziehungswissenschaft und pädagogische Wirklichkeit: Vol. 8. Finken-Verlag.
  33. Retter, H. (1979). Spielzeug: Handbuch zur Geschichte und Pädagogik der Spielmittel. Beltz.
  34. Roopnarine, J. L. (1986). Mothers’ and fathers’ behaviors toward the toy play of their infant sons and daughters. Sex Roles, 14(1-2), 59–68. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00287848
  35. RStudio Team. (2021). RStudio: Integrated Development for R. RStudio, PBC, Boston, MA. http://www.rstudio.com/
  36. Salinas-Quiroz, F., & Sweder N. (2023). Authentic gender development in non-binary children. Frontiers in Sociology, 8, 1177766. https://doi.org/10.3389/fsoc.2023.1177766
  37. Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2019). Investigating the use of robotics to increase girls’ interest in engineering during early elementary school. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 29(5), 1033–1051. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10798-018-9483-y
  38. Tesolin, J., & Lo, E. (2023). “Boys Love Boy Toys”: A qualitative study exploring the role of fathers in young boys’ gendered toy preferences. Discover Psychology, 3(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44202-023-00097-z
  39. Todd, B. K., Fischer, R. A., Di Costa, S., Roestorf, A., Harbour, K., Hardiman, P., & Barry, J. A. (2018). Sex differences in children’s toy preferences: A systematic review, meta-regression, and meta-analysis. Infant and Child Development, 27(2), e2064. https://doi.org/10.1002/icd.2064
  40. Uttal, D. H., Meadow, N. G., Tipton, E., Hand, L. L., Alden, A. R., Warren, C., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). The malleability of spatial skills: A meta-analysis of training studies. Psychological Bulletin, 139(2), 352–402. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0028446
  41. Wachs, T. D. (1985). Toys as an aspect of the physical environment: Constraints and nature of relationship to development. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 5(3), 31–46. https://doi.org/10.1177/027112148500500304
  42. Walther, B. K. (2003). Playing and gaming: Reflections and classifications. The International Journal of Computer Game Research, 3(1), 1–12.
  43. Wilcox, R. R. (2017). Introduction to robust estimation and hypothesis testing (4th edition). Statistics. Elsevier Academic Press.
  44. Wolfgang, C. H., & Stakenas, R. G. (1985). An exploration of toy content of preschool children’s home environments as a predictor of cognitive development. Early Child Development and Care, 19(4), 291–307. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443850190403
  45. Wong, W. I. & Yeung, S. P. (2019). Early gender differences in spatial and social skills and their relations to play and parental socialization in children from Hong Kong. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 48, 1589-1602. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10508-019-1415-8
LICENSE
Creative Commons License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.