Smart Toy Based Learning

  • Kursat Cagiltay
  • Nuri Kara
  • Cansu Cigdem Aydin


This chapter examines the general characteristics of and related recent research on smart toys. Smart toys can be defined as new forms of toys featuring both tangible objects and electronic components that facilitate two-way child–smart toy interactions to carry out purposeful tasks. In this chapter, smart toy based learning projects are discussed and the characteristics of smart toys as cognitive tools to facilitate learning are analyzed. This chapter also covers the relationship between smart toys and children’s developmental stages—with a particular focus on motivation—in order to understand smart toys’ potential effects on children.


Toy Smart toy Cognitive tool 


  1. Alimisis, D., Moro, M., Arlegui, J., Pina, A., Frangu, S., & Papanikolaou, K. (2007). Robotics & constructivism in education: The TERECoP project. In I. Kalas (Ed.), Proceedings of the 11th EuroLogo conference (pp. 1–11).Google Scholar
  2. Axline, V. M. (1974). Play therapy. New York, NY: Ballantine.Google Scholar
  3. Boucher, S., & Amery, J. (2009). Play and development. In A. Justin (Ed.), Children’s palliative care in Africa (pp. 37–77). Oxford: Oxford University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Butterworth, G., & Harris, M. (1994). Principles of developmental psychology. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  5. *Cassell, J., & Ryokai, K. (2001). Making space for voice: Technologies to support children’s fantasy and storytelling. Personal and Ubiquitous Computing, 5(3), 169–190.Google Scholar
  6. Fontijn, W., & Mendels, P. (2005, May 8–13). StoryToy: The interactive storytelling toy. In H. Gellersen, R. Want, & A. Schmidt (Eds.), Third International Conference, PERVASIVE 2005. Munich, Germany. Proceedings series: Lecture notes in computer science, 3468, 37–42.Google Scholar
  7. Frei, P., Su, V., Mikhak, B., & Ishii, H. (2000). curlybot: Designing a new class of computational toys. Proceedings of the SIGCHI conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 129–136). New York: ACM Press. doi:  10.1145/332040.332416.
  8. Glos, J., & Cassell, J. (1997). Rosebud: Technological toys for storytelling. In S. Pemberton (Ed.), Proceedings of the conference on human factors in computing systems (pp. 359–360). New York, NY: ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hannafin, M. J., Land, S., & Oliver, K. (1999). Open learning environments: Foundations, methods, and models. In C. M. Reigeluth (Ed.), Instructional design theories and models: A new paradigm of instructional theory (Vol. II, pp. 115–140). London: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  10. Hinske, S., Lampe, M., Yuill, N., Price, S., & Langheinrich, M. (2010). Let the play set come alive: Supporting playful learning through the digital augmentation of a traditional toy environment. Proceedings of the 6th IEEE International Workshop on Pervasive Learning (PerEL) at PerCom 2010 (pp. 280–285). Mannheim, Germany.Google Scholar
  11. Hunter, S., Kalanithi, J., & Merrill, D. (2010). Make a riddle and telestory: Designing children’s applications for the Siftables platform. In Proceedings of 9th International Conference on Interaction Design and Children (pp. 206–209). New York, NY: ACM Press.Google Scholar
  12. *Jonassen, D. H. (1992). What are cognitive tools? In P. D. Kommers, D. H. Jonassen, & J. T. Mayes (Eds.), Cognitive tools for learning (pp. 1–6). New York: Springer Verlag.Google Scholar
  13. Joolingen, W. V. (1999). Cognitive tools for discovery learning. International Journal of Artificial Intelligence in Education, 10, 385–397.Google Scholar
  14. *Kara, N., Aydin, C. C., & Cagiltay, K. (2012a). Design and development of a smart storytelling toy. Interactive Learning Environments. doi:  10.1080/10494820.2011.649767.
  15. *Kara, N., Aydin, C. C., & Cagiltay, K. (2012b). User study of a new smart toy for children’s storytelling. Interactive Learning Environments. doi:  10.1080/10494820.2012.682587.
  16. Kim, B., & Reeves, T. C. (2007). Reframing research on learning with technology: In search of the meaning of cognitive tools. Instructional Science, 35, 207–256.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Kudrowitz, B., & Wallace, D. (2009). The play pyramid: A play classification and ideation tool for toy design. Retrieved from
  18. Lampe, M., & Hinske, S., (2007). Integrating interactive learning experiences into augmented toy environments. Proceedings of Pervasive Learning Workshop at Pervasive 2007 (pp. 1–9). Toronto, Canada.Google Scholar
  19. Levin, D. E., & Rosenquest, B. (2001). The increasing role of ­electronic toys in the lives of infants and toddlers: Should we be concerned? Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2(2), 242–247.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Liu, M., & Bera, S. (2005). An analysis of cognitive tool use patterns in a hypermedia learning environment. Educational Technology Research and Development, 53(1), 5–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. *Luckin, R., Connolly, D., Plowman, L., & Airey, S. (2003). Children’s interactions with interactive toy technology. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19(2), 165–176.Google Scholar
  22. *Malone, T. W., & Lepper, M. R. (1987). Making learning fun: A taxonomy of intrinsic motivations for learning. In R. E. Snow & M. J. Farr (Eds.), Aptitude learning and instruction: Volume 3: Cognitive and affective process analyses (pp. 223–253). Retrieved from
  23. Mauch, E. (2001). Using technological innovation to improve the problem-solving skills of middle school students: Educators’ experiences with the LEGO Mindstorms robotic invention system. The Clearing House, 74(4), 211–213.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. McVee, M. B., Dunsmore, K., & Gavelek, J. R. (2005). Schema theory revisited. Review of Educational Research, 75(4), 531–566.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Merrill, D., Kalanithi, J., & Maes, P. (2007). Siftables: Towards sensor network user interfaces. In Proceedings of First International Conference on Tangible and Embedded Interaction (pp. 75–78).Google Scholar
  26. Peretti, P. O., & Sydney, T. M. (1984). Parental toy choice stereotyping and its effects on child toy preference and sex-role typing. Social Behavior and Personality, 12(2), 213–216.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Petersson, E., & Brooks, A. (2006). Virtual and physical toys: Open-ended features for non-formal learning. Cyberpsychology & Behavior, 9(2), 196–199.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. *Piaget, J. (1962). The stages of the intellectual development of the child. In A. Slater & D. Muir (Eds.), The Blackwell reader in developmental psychology (pp. 35–42). Malden, MA: Blackwell.Google Scholar
  29. Piaget, J. (1964). Development and learning. In R. E. Ripple & V. N. Rockcastle (Eds.), Piaget rediscovered: Report of the conference on cognitive studies and curriculum development (pp. 7–20). Ithaca, NY: Cornell University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Piper, B., & Ishii, H. (2002). PegBlocks: A learning aid for the elementary classroom. In L. Terveen & D. Wixon (Eds.), CHI ‘02 extended abstracts on human factors in computing systems (pp. 686–687). Minneapolis, MN: ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. *Plowman, L., & Stephen, C. (2003). A ‘benign addition’? Research on ICT and pre-school children. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 19, 149–164.Google Scholar
  32. *Price, S., & Rogers, Y. (2004). Let‘s get physical: The learning benefits of interacting in digitally augmented physical spaces. Computers in Education, 43(1–2), 137–151.Google Scholar
  33. *Resnick, M. (1998). Technologies for lifelong kindergarten. Educational Technology Research and Development, 46(4), 43–55.Google Scholar
  34. *Roussou, M. (2004). Learning by doing and learning through play: An exploration of inter-activity in virtual environments for children. ACM Journal on Computers in Entertainment, 2(1), 1–23.Google Scholar
  35. Ryokai, K., & Cassell, J. (1999). Computer support for children’s collaborative fantasy play and storytelling. In Proceedings of the 1999 conference on Computer support for collaborative learning (p. 63). International Society of the Learning Sciences.Google Scholar
  36. The NPD Group Inc. (2011). World toy sales in 2010 were $83.3 billion, an increase of nearly 5 percent over 2009 [Press release]. Retrieved from
  37. Toy Industry Association, Inc. (2007). Consumer perceptions of ­electronic toys. New York, NY: Author.Google Scholar
  38. Vaucelle, C., & Jehan, T. (2002). Dolltalk: a computational toy to enhance children’s creativity. In CHI ’02 Extended Abstracts on Human Factors in Computing Systems (pp. 776–777). New York, NY: ACM Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Kursat Cagiltay
    • 1
  • Nuri Kara
    • 1
  • Cansu Cigdem Aydin
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Computer Education and Instructional TechnologyMiddle East Technical UniversityAnkaraTurkey
  2. 2.Management DepartmentAtilim Universityncek-AnkaraTurkey

Personalised recommendations