Verified by 
Key points
- Previous research has found lower levels of free play in children of Asian descent vs. Euro-American descent.
- Among children in Tokyo, we observed a preference for play based on rules over open-ended, creative play.
- Japanese child-centered spaces encouraged more structured and learning-based play than is common in the U.S.
In May of this year (2024), a colleague and I traveled with a group of 15 American college students to Tokyo, Japan. The trip was part of an honors course on play across cultures. Before leaving, the students learned about developments in play, play therapy, and cultural similarities and differences in play. They also observed children at play in the United States so that they would have some points of comparison.
As the students learned in class, previous research suggests that play looks different when comparing children from Asian ethnic backgrounds to those from Western backgrounds. For example, pretend play is less common among Korean-Americans than Anglo-Americans (Farver & Lee Shin, 1997). Additionally, as opposed to the fantastic and danger themes common in Anglo-American play, Korean-American children may be more likely to reenact every day activities and family role themes.
Similarly, Farver et al. (1995) found more parallel and less pretend play among Korean-American 3- to 5-year-olds, and reported their play to be more highly structured, more cooperative, and less competitive and aggressive compared to their Anglo-American peers. This study and another by Parmar and colleagues (2008) found that Asian-American parents spent more time on pre-academic activities with their children, and less time engaged in fantasy play.
When Japanese children do engage in pretend play, it is often very rule-based. As Takahashi (2016) found, for Japanese children, “playing roles means playing rules” (p. 94). The larger emphasis in play on rules, structure, and academics as opposed to fantasy is likely attributable to both parents and teachers in Asian cultures focusing more on academics and less on fantasy and imagination. Izumi-Taylor and colleagues (2010) found that Japanese teachers of children ages 1-6 find play to be a source of possibilities and empowerment, but that they are seldom involved in the play of their students.
This finding was echoed by Synodi (2010). Play at school in Japan in this study was limited to child-initiated or teacher-directed play, but teachers did not play with or participate in the play of their students. This aligns with Farver et al.’s (1995) finding that Korean preschools are frequently organized around developing academic skills, but play is limited to outdoor activities; in the classroom, limited play materials are available.
When we were in Japan, we were able to observe a lot of these differences in the various child-centered settings that we visited. In an earlier post, I discussed several locations where we observed play that was highly structured, themed, and organized. In this entry, I will detail three of our additional destinations where we observed play that was very rule-based and involved a lot of cooperation. I will also describe how we witnessed academic-based play.
At Shinjuku National Park, a large area full of gardens, ponds, grassy fields, and open spaces, we expected to see children playing freely. We did encounter some large groups engaging in "play" in the open areas/ grassy fields, but it appeared to be mostly structured forms of play. They took part in rule-based, organized, large-group games. We did not witness much (if any) free, creative play, which had been very common in the students’ observations of children at play in parks in the United States.
We were excited to visit Kidzania Tokyo – described as “an interactive city made for children." Here, we thought we might encounter some creative play. Kidzania is a mini metropolis at which children can perform “jobs” for 45 min or so at a time, such as ice cream maker, courier, airplane pilot, fire fighter, hospital worker, or fashion show model, among many others. While the space is highly unique, fun, and creative in its design, from what we observed, children do not engage in any free play there. In fact, some might argue that their experience with practicing careers might not be considered “play” at all, but more of a learning- or career preparation-based activity.
At each of the different job centers, children are directed on exactly what to do and how to do it, in the structured fashion that seems to be common in Japanese culture.
The afterschool program that we were privileged to visit – known as “Chance for All” (CFA) – prides itself on offering choice to Japanese children in first through third grades. Their main objective is to give Japanese children options of what they would like to do with their time after school as opposed to regulated, structured time. Indeed, the children are free to choose to do homework, engage in arts and crafts, or simply play for the time that they are there (usually from about 3 p.m. until about 8 p.m.). They can even eat a snack at a time of their choosing.
Despite this admirable freedom — which seems somewhat uncommon in Japanese culture — the children’s “choices” at CFA are primarily limited to structured activities such as board games or tablet play. There is not a large play space, nor much access to an outdoor play space. The most open-ended activity that we saw children engage in was origami, but even that is an activity that is somewhat limited, because it is structured according to rules on how to make different objects. At CFA, many children chose to engage in academic-based activities such as homework or calligraphy practice. To us, these decisions reflected the nature of the culture, which emphasizes structure and success at school and beyond.
In sum, the play observed in Japan looked quite different from what the students had observed in the United States. In line with previous research, Japanese children engaged in very little pretend play, were very highly structured in their play, and frequently chose leisure activities that were academic or learning-based in nature. Child-centered spaces – while creative in design – did not allow for free play. When given the opportunity for free play at parks or in after school programs, Japanese children primarily opted for structured activities. These were striking cultural differences that permeated each of the locations we visited. Whether this type of play is more or less beneficial for children remains to be seen.
