An Enactive Characterization of Pretend Play

ABSTRACT

This paper presents the result of an empirical study of 32 adult dyads (i.e. groups of two people) engaged in pretend play. Our analysis indicates that participatory sense-making plays a key role in the success of pretend play sessions. We use the cognitive science theory of enaction as a theoretical lens to analyze the empirical data given its robust conceptual framework for describing participatory sense-making. We present here five enactive characteristics of pretend play that appear to be necessary and sufficient for the emergence and maintenance of successful pretend play -- mental preparation, meaning building, narrative enaction, narrative deepening, and flow maintenance. This enactive formalization is used to propose a computational model of pretend play that can be used to design an agent capable of playing in real time with human users.

References

1. Bartneck, C. and Forlizzi, J.A design-centred framework for social human-robot interaction. Robot and Human Interactive Communication, 2004. ROMAN 2004. 13th IEEE International Workshop on, (2004), 591--594.
2. Baumer, A. and Magerko, B.Narrative development in improvisational theatre. In Interactive Storytelling. Springer, 2009, 140--151.
3. Bello, P.Pretense and cognitive architecture. Advances in Cognitive Systems 2, (2012), 43--58.
4. Beyls, P.Interaction and Self-organisation in a Society of Musical Agents. Proceedings of ECAL 2007 Workshop on Music and Artificial Life (MusicAL 2007), (2007).
5. Boden, M.A.The Creative Mind: Myths and Mechanisms. Weidenfeld & Nicolson, London, 1990.
6. Brown, S.L.Play: How it shapes the brain, opens the imagination, and invigorates the soul. Penguin, 2009.
7. Caillois, R.Man, play, and games. University of Illinois Press, 2001.
8. Colton, S., López de Mantaras, R., and Stock, O.Computational Creativity: Coming of Age. .
9. Csikszentmihalyi, M.Flow. Springer, 2014.
10. Davis, N., Do, E.Y.-L., Gupta, P., and Gupta, S.Computing harmony with PerLogicArt: perceptual logic inspired collaborative art. Proceedings of the 8th ACM conference on Creativity and cognition, 2011, 185--194.
11. Davis, N., Popova, Y., Sysoev, I., Hsiao, C.-P., Zhang, D., and Magerko, B.Building Artistic Computer Colleagues with an Enactive Model of Creativity. International Conference on Computational Creativity, AAAI (2014).
12. Eigenfeldt, A. and Pasquier, P.Negotiated content: generative soundscape composition by autonomous musical agents in coming together: freesound. Proceedings of the Second International Conference on Computational Creativity, Mexico City, (2011), 27--32.
13. Fuchs, T. and de Jaegher, H.Enactive intersubjectivity: Participatory sense-making and mutual incorporation. Phenomenology and the Cognitive Sciences 8, 4 (2009), 465--486.
14. Glaser, B.G., Strauss, A.L., and Strutzel, E.The discovery of grounded theory; strategies for qualitative research. Nursing Research 17, 4 (1968), 364.
15. Huizinga, J.Homo Ludens: A study of the play element in culture. Routledge, 1950.
16. Jacob, M., Coisne, G., Gupta, A., Sysoev, I., Verma, G.G., and Magerko, B.Viewpoints AI. AIIDE, (2013).
17. Magerko, B., Manzoul, W., Riedl, M., et al.An Empirical Study of Cognition and Theatrical Improvisation. Proceedings of the Seventh ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition, ACM (2009), 117--126.
18. McCormack, J.Eden: An Evolutionary Sonic Ecosystem. In J. Kelemen and P. Sosík, eds., Advances in Artificial Life SE - 13. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2001, 133--142.
19. Morgenthaler, S.K.The meanings in play with objects. Play from birth to twelve and beyond: contexts, perspectives, and meanings, (1998), 359--367.
20. Nichols, S. and Stich, S.P.Mindreading: An integrated account of pretence, self-awareness, and understanding other minds. Clarendon Press/Oxford University Press, 2003.
21. O'Neill, B., Piplica, A., Fuller, D., and Magerko, B.A Knowledge-Based Framework for the Collaborative Improvisation of Scene Introductions. In M. Si, D. Thue, E. André, J. Lester, J. Tanenbaum and V. Zammitto, eds., Interactive Storytelling SE - 10. Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2011, 85--96.
22. Pellegrini, A.D. and Smith, P.K.Physical Activity Play: The Nature and Function of a Neglected Aspect of Play. Child Development 69, 3 (1998), 577--598.
23. Popova, Y.B.Narrativity and enaction: the social nature of literary narrative understanding. Frontiers in psychology 5, (2014), 895.
24. Power, T.G.Play and exploration in children and animals. Psychology Press, 1999.
25. Rosch, E.Cognitive representations of semantic categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General 104, 1975, 192--233.
26. Sawyer, R.K.Pretend play as improvisation: Conversation in the preschool classroom. Psychology Press, 1997.
27. Sawyer, R.K.Improvised dialogues: Emergence and creativity in conversation. Greenwood Publishing Group, 2003.
28. Stewart, J.R., Gapenne, O., and Di Paolo, E.A.Enaction: Toward a new paradigm for cognitive science. MIT Press, 2010.
29. Sutton-Smith, B.The role of toys in the instigation of playful creativity. Creativity Research Journal 5, 1 (1992), 3--11.
30. Vernon, D.Artificial Cognitive Systems. MIT Press, 2014.
31. Wiggins, G. a.A preliminary framework for description, analysis and comparison of creative systems. Knowledge-Based Systems 19, 7 (2006), 449--458.
32. Zook, A., Magerko, B., and Riedl, M.Formally Modeling Pretend Object Play. Proceedings of the 8th ACM Conference on Creativity and Cognition, ACM (2011), 147--156.

Index Terms

• Human-centered computing