Skip to main content
NCBI home page
NIHPA Author Manuscripts logoLink to NIHPA Author Manuscripts
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 May 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Appl Dev Psychol. 2020 Apr 8;68:101134. doi: 10.1016/j.appdev.2020.101134

Toy Buying Today: Considerations, Information Seeking, and Thoughts about Manufacturer Suggested Age

Melissa N Richards 1, Diane L Putnick 1,*, Marc H Bornstein 1,2
PMCID: PMC7219796  NIHMSID: NIHMS1583269  PMID: 32405125

Abstract

Children frequently play with toys purchased by their parents, yet little is known about the how these toys are selected by parents. Mothers with children from 0–12 years of age filled out a survey about their toy purchasing habits. Results revealed that the most common place mothers sought out information about toys was online, and mothers most frequently found the manufacturers’ suggested age only somewhat accurate. Further analyses demonstrated that mothers who bought their toys from different sources (i.e., online, stores, secondhand) considered dissimilar items before purchasing a toy for their child and obtained information in distinct ways. In contrast, regardless of where mothers purchased toys, they regarded the manufacturers’ suggested age in the same way. This study is one of the few to examine parental toy selection patterns, providing useful knowledge for understanding how to reach parents and provide them information they desire when selecting toys for their children.

Keywords: toys, toy purchasing, parenting, parenting choices, play

Play has been considered the work of a child and in many ways play prepares children for life. In turn, toys are the building blocks of children’s play, and parents are the usual suppliers of toys for children. Toy play between parents and children makes up a large proportion of parent-child interaction (Roggman, Langlois, & Hubbs-Tait, 1987), and a large part of children’s playtime involves interactions with toys (Glassy & Romano, 2003). The toy industry in the United States alone commands a market size of nearly $27B annually (Toy Industry Association, 2017). Despite the ubiquity and developmental significance of toys, we lack solid information about where parents find children’s toys (particularly with the advent of online shopping; Rosen, 2017; Smith & Anderson, 2016), what they consider when they purchase children’s toys, how they gather information about children’s toys, and what they think about manufacturers’ suggested age and labeling. Hence, exploring parents’ toy preferences and purchases is central to children’s development. Such knowledge can also provide useful information for toy manufacturers, developmental scientists, and child development professionals who provide guidance to parents. This study reports the results of an exploratory survey of parents about several aspects of their toy selection.

Diversification of Toy Purchasing

In recent years, toy purchasing has moved online, particularly with the closure of industry leaders, such as Toys R’ Us (Rizzo & Kapner, 2017; Thompson, 2018). Parents appreciate the convenience of not having to leave their homes to get their children toys and online shopping gives consumers the ability to compare the prices between different retailers, allowing for more savings (Rosen, 2017; Smith & Anderson, 2016). Online toy purchasing has introduced immediate product reviews (Flanagin, Metzger, Pure, Markov, & Hartsell, 2014), yet removed parents’ ability to examine toys first hand. Parents who shop online are also less likely to receive their children’s input on their toy purchases, because children have a large influence on what parents purchase when with their mothers and fathers in a brick and mortar store (Ebster, Wagner, & Neumeuller, 2009; Valkenburg & Cantor, 2001).

Parental Considerations when Purchasing Toys

Parents must consider a variety of factors before giving a toy to their child. Recent surveys of parents with children aged 2–10 years indicate that parents look to build their children’s creativity, problem solving, social abilities, and motor skills during play (Gallup, 2017). One study found that parents preferred to give their children toys that were advertised as promoting unstructured play, as many parents believe this type of toy play is beneficial to their children (Gardner, Golinkoff, Hirsh-Pasek, & Heiney-Gonzalez, 2012). Parents will often use items traditionally thought of as instructive (e.g., flashcards) in play, suggesting that education is also an important goal when choosing toys (Fisher, Hirsh-Pasek, Golinkoff, & Gryfe, 2008). In addition, toy safety, price, and the child gender to which the toy is aimed are important toy purchasing considerations for parents (Al Kurdi, 2017; Fallon & Harris, 1989). In particular, parents favor gender neutral and same-gender-typed toys than cross gender-typed toys for their children (Kollmayer, Schultes, Schober, Hodosi, & Spiel, 2018), and are more likely to purchase toys for their children that are marketed for their child’s gender (Fisher-Thompson, 1993). In addition, parents take their children’s requests for toys into consideration, with one study with Australian children indicating that children request specific brands of toys when asking for gifts (O’Cass & Clarke, 2002).

Information Sources for Toys

Given the features of toys that parents take into account when purchasing toys, it is clear that their toy buying decisions are based on information gathered from multiple sources. Sources of information that parents trust for health-related information, such as vaccines, have been widely studied, indicating that family, friends, pediatricians, the internet, and media are all used as prominent information sources (Bornstein, Cote, Haynes, Hahn, & Park, 2010; Kennedy, Basket, & Sheedy, 2011; Tamis-LeMonda, Chen & Bornstein, 1998). Studies specifically examining parent toy selection and information sources have not been conducted since the proliferation of internet resources, but older studies suggest that parents rely on recommendations from other parents and advertisements as information sources when seeking facts about toys (Fallon & Harris, 1989). With that said, not all advertisement information is as valued by parents—one study suggests that parents are turned off by advertisements that boast a toy’s potential to boost their children’s brain development, as parents preferred toys with advertisements claiming the toy’s ability to contribute to the child’s social and intellectual development (Gardner et al., 2012). Nonetheless, little is known specifically about where parents obtain information about the toys that their children play with in the internet age.

Toy Manufacturers and Labeling

Manufacturers typically print a suggested age or age range on the package of the toy. Two types of age labeling are used: (1) a required warning label if the toy has small parts, balloons, or small balls that are choking hazards and (2) an optional age label based on a typical child’s developmental skills at a certain age (Kulak & Stein, 2016). Manufacturers stand to benefit from providing accurate age labeling to ensure safety and to instill consumer trust (U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 2020). Despite the widespread nature of manufacturer age labeling, the information provided on a toy package has historically not been very important to parents (Fallon & Harris, 1989). Studies suggest that parents know very little about toy manufacturers, except for when news programs report information about recalls and other negative toy related events (Hogan, 2007). In fact, many consumers admit that their children play with toys that manufacturers suggest as appropriate for younger or older children (Langlois et al., 1991). Studies have not yet assessed whether parents think the manufacturer’s suggested age is accurate or not, and whether parents take this information into account when giving toys to their children.

Understanding parents’ decisions about toy purchases has a large practical impact on children’s development. By having a solid knowledge base of what types of information parents look for when giving toys to their children (e.g., educational value, safety) and where they try to find this information (e.g., from a pediatrician, online reviews), as well as where parents purchase their toys (e.g., online, in a store, secondhand), it makes toy manufacturers, retailers, and child development professionals aware of the information parents seek and the most efficacious channels for spreading this material. In addition, knowledge about what parents think about a manufacturers’ suggested age can have large consequences on their ability to choose safe toys for their child and avoid hazards. From a policy perspective, understanding how much parents value and pay attention to labeling, particularly in different retail environments where labeling may not be as readily available (i.e., a label may not be viewable to a parent buying blocks online), can have an impact on how entities like the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission control the proper dissemination of safety information if labels are not available.

The Current Study

This study is primarily exploratory in nature. First, we examine the most common places parents obtain toys for their children, what they consider before buying them, and where they obtain information about toys. Then, we analyze any differences in considerations behind toy buying for parents who primarily buy their toys online versus those who purchase them secondhand or in brick-and-mortar stores. We also investigate whether and how information sources about toys differ by the way that parents shop for them (e.g., are parents who buy toys mostly online more likely to obtain information about toys from parenting blogs or online reviews?). Finally, we investigate how parents who obtain toys from different sources regard the manufacturers’ suggested age; as the manufacturers’ suggested age is often not available in online or secondhand purchasing venues.

Research Questions

Given the novelty of this study, we do not have directional hypotheses. Rather, we intend to investigate several research questions:

  • RQ1: What are the most common places that parents obtain toys for their children?

  • RQ2: What are the most common topics parents consider before purchasing toys?

  • RQ3: What are the most common sources parents turn to when seeking information about toys?

  • RQ4: Do parents think that manufacturers’ suggested age for a toy is important and/or accurate?

  • RQ5: Do parents’ responses differ by their main method of toy procurement?

By answering these research questions, we aim to paint a picture of the realities behind how parents select toys in their children’s play. In addition, these data provide knowledge about potential differences that may exist between groups of parents who most frequently obtain toys from particular sources. Such knowledge has useful implications when determining what types of information parents use when making toy purchasing decisions and the most effective channels for providing that information to parents—enabling parents to make the best toy choices for their child.

Method

Participants

Mothers (N = 193) lived in the Washington, DC, metropolitan area, were between 27 and 51 years of age (M= 37.55, SD= 4.99); most were married (87.6%), and highly educated (94.3% earned a bachelor’s degree or higher). Mothers were 69.3% White, Non-Hispanic, 13.5% Asian American, 8.3% African American, 4.7% White, Hispanic, and 4.1% Other or Mixed race. To be eligible for the study, mothers had at least one child between 1 and 8 years of age. Overall, mothers had between 1–6 children aged 0–12 years. Most mothers had one (48.2%) or two (40.9%) children, but 7.8% had three, and 2.6% had four or more. Data collection took place throughout 2016–2017.

Procedure

Mothers were recruited through mailings, flyers, and snowball recruiting as part of a larger behavioral study about children’s toy play. When mothers brought their children into the laboratory to participate in the behavioral experiment (Richards, Putnick, Bradley, Lang, Little, Suwalsky, & Bornstein, under review), they completed a survey of demographics, toy choices, and purchases while their children participated in the study.

Survey

This survey was created specifically for this study. Mothers reported where they obtain toys for their children. They were asked to choose one of eight options as the most frequent source of their child’s toys: (a) local toy store, (b) national chain toy store, (c) national chain department store, (d) dollar store/variety store, (e) online, (f) thrift store/garage sales/secondhand/hand-me-down, (g) gifts from family and friends, and (h) other.

Next, mothers reported on the following questions about the characteristics they take into consideration when selecting toys. The questions were structured as follows: “How often do you consider [insert item] before choosing toys for your child?”. The items were (a) educational qualities, (b) safety, (c) visual appearance (e.g., the toy is visually appealing), (d) popularity (e.g., everyone is buying one for their child), (e) availability, (f) price, (g) whether or not my child asked me to buy the toy, (h) age of intended use, (i) gender to which the toy is aimed, (j) race/culture/ethnicity depicted in toy, (k) durability, (l) violence level of toy, (m) child’s skills and abilities, and (n) child’s personality. Response options for all questions were the following: (1) Never, (2) Rarely, (3) Sometimes, (4) Often, (5) Always. Parents also answered the following question: “If you had to choose ONE of the options below as your most frequent consideration before choosing toys for your child, which would it be?” Response options were (a)-(n) listed above.

Third, mothers reported on where they obtain information about toys. These questions were structured as follows: “How often do you gather information about toys from [insert item]?”. The items were: (a) other parents I know, (b) friends, (c) family (not including my child), (d) my child, (e) pediatricians/child development professionals, (f) parenting websites/blogs, (g) parenting listservs/online parenting communities, (h) internet reviews, (i) advertising, (j) product catalogs, (k) magazines, (l) newspapers, (m) television shows, and (n) other. Response options for all questions were the following: (1) Never, (2) Rarely, (3) Sometimes, (4) Often, (5) Always. Parents also answered the following question: “If you had to choose ONE of the below options as the most frequent source of your information, which would it be?” Response options were (a)-(n) listed above.

Finally, mothers were asked about their thoughts on manufacturer toy age recommendations and instructions. Mothers responded to the following questions: (1) “How important do you think the manufacturer’s suggested age labeled on toys is?”—(a) Not important at all, (b) A little important, (c) Somewhat important, (d) Important, (e) Extremely important; (2) “How accurate do you think the manufacturer’s suggested age labeled on toys is?”—(a) Not accurate at all, (b) A little accurate, (c) Somewhat accurate, (d) Accurate, (e) Extremely accurate; (3) “Do you read the manufacturer’s suggested age printed on the labels of toys?”—(a) Never, (b) Rarely, (c) Sometimes, (d) Often, (e) Always”; and (4) “Do you read the directions that come with toys?”—(a) Never, (b) Rarely, (c) Sometimes, (d) Often, (e) Always.

Results

Descriptive Information

Mothers reported that the most frequent source of their children’s toys were online (30.6%), followed by gifts (26.4%), thrift stores/garage sales/secondhand/hand-me-down (21.8%), national chain department stores (10.9%), local toy stores (7.3%), national chain toy stores (2.6%), and other (0.5%). Regarding the most frequent consideration before buying a toy, the most popular characteristics were educational qualities (32.1%), the child’s personality (20.2%), the child’s skills and abilities (13.0%), safety (11.9%), whether or not the child asked the parent to buy the toy (7.3%), price (3.6%), other (3.6%), age of intended use (3.1%), durability (2.6%), and violence level (1.6%). Mothers indicated that their most frequent sources of information about toys were internet reviews (39.4%), other parents (20.2%), the child (11.4%), parenting websites/blogs (7.3%), friends (5.2%), parenting listservs/online parenting communities (4.7%), other (4.7%), family members not including the child (4.1%), advertising (1.6%), and product catalogs (1.6%).

On the topic of manufacturer suggested age and instructions, 39.4% of mothers thought the suggested age label on toys is somewhat important, 31.1% important, 21.8% a little important, 5.2% extremely important, 2.1% not important at all. Most mothers (62.2%) found the suggested age label somewhat accurate, 20.2% found it accurate, 14.0% found it a little accurate, 2.1% not accurate at all, and 1% extremely accurate. Some mothers (38.3%) reported always reading the manufacturer’s suggested age printed on toy labels, whereas 34.2% reported reading it often, 21.8% reading it sometimes, 4.7% rarely, and 1.0% never. Likewise, 40.4% of mothers often read the directions that come with toys, 34.7% sometimes read the directions, 15.5% always read them, 8.8% rarely do, and 0.5% never read them. See Table 1 for descriptive statistics of individual survey questions.

Table 1.

Descriptive statistics of survey questions for all mothers in the sample

Survey Questions: Mean Standard Deviation Minimum Maximum
Where Mothers Obtain Toys:
Response Options—(1) Never, (2) Rarely, (3)Sometimes, (4) Often, (5) Always 		How often do you obtain toys from a local toy store? 2.33 0.838 1 5
How often do you obtain toys from a national toy store? 2.36 0.894 1 5
How often do you obtain toys from a national chain department store? 2.37 1.017 1 5
How often do you obtain toys from a dollar store/variety store? 1.94 0.879 1 4
How often do you obtain toys online? 3.32 0.856 1 5
How often do you obtain toys from thrift store/garage sale/secondhand/hand-me-down? 2.78 1.198 1 5
How often do you obtain toys as gifts from family/friends? 3.47 0.638 1 5
How often do you obtain toys from another source not mentioned? 1.36 0.807 1 5
What Mothers Consider:
Response Options—(1) Never, (2) Rarely, (3) Sometimes, (4) Often, (5) Always 		How often do you consider educational qualities of toys before buying? 4.08 0.71 1 5
How often do you consider safety of toys before buying? 4.5 0.723 2 5
How often do you consider visual appearance of toys before buying? 3.67 0.855 1 5
How often do you consider the popularity of toys before buying? 2.38 0.84 1 4
How often do you consider the availability of toys before buying? 2.64 1.112 1 5
How often do you consider the price of toys before buying? 4.25 0.764 2 5
How often do you consider whether or not child asked you to buy the toy before buying? 2.97 1.177 1 5
How often do you consider the age of intended use of toys before buying? 3.87 0.948 1 5
How often do you consider the gender to which the toy is aimed before buying? 2.49 1.1 1 5
How often do you consider race/culture/ethnicity depicted in the toy before buying? 2.14 1.097 1 5
How often do you consider the durability of the toy before buying? 3.92 0.793 1 5
How often do you consider the violence level of toys before buying? 4.33 1.038 1 5
How often do you consider child’s skills and abilities before buying toys? 4.17 0.745 1 5
How often do you consider child’s personality before buying toys? 4.15 0.854 1 5
Where Mothers Get Information:
Response Options—(1) Never, (2) Rarely, (3) Sometimes, (4) Often, (5) Always 		How often do you gather information about toys from other parents you know? 3.01 0.845 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from friends? 2.77 0.901 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from family (not including child)? 2.6 0.942 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from your child? 2.88 1.053 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from pediatricians/child development professionals? 2.04 0.926 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from parenting websites/blogs? 2.78 0.911 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from parenting listservs/online parenting communities? 2.63 0.971 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from internet reviews? 3.51 0.861 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from advertising? 2.21 0.751 1 5
How often do you gather info about toys from product catalogs? 1.92 0.859 1 4
How often do you gather info about toys from magazines? 1.87 0.779 1 4
How often do you gather info about toys from newspapers? 1.37 0.59 1 4
How often do you gather info about toys TV shows? 1.69 0.755 1 4
Manufacturer’s Suggested Age and Instructions:
Response Options Indicated Below Question 		How important is the manufacturer’s suggested age label on toys to you?
(1) Not important at all, (2) A little important, (3) Somewhat important, (4) Important, (5) Extremely important 		3.16 0.896 1 5
How accurate do you think the suggested age label is?
(1) Not accurate at all, (2) A little accurate, (3) Somewhat accurate, (4) Accurate, (5) Extremely accurate 		3.04 0.685 1 5
Do you read the manufacturer’s suggested age printed on toy labels?
(1) Never, (2) Rarely, (3) Sometimes, (4) Often, (5) Always 		4.04 0.94 1 5
Do you read the directions that come with toys?
(1) Never, (2) Rarely, (3) Sometimes, (4) Often, (5) Always 		3.62 0.871 1 5
Open in a new tab

Analytic Plan

To answer our research question that sought to investigate potential differences in responses to the survey by the mother’s most frequent source of obtaining toys, we created a simplified independent variable that collapsed the response options of the most common source of the household’s toys. First, we omitted mothers who identified gifts as their most frequent source of toys (n= 51) or reported other (n=1, parent reported that child makes his own toys), because these mothers are not participating in the selection of the toys themselves. Then, we collapsed all types of brick-and-mortar stores into one category (local toy store, national toy store, national department store). This left three categories of most frequent sources of toys: stores (n = 40), online (n = 59), and thrift store/garage sales/secondhand/hand-me-down (referred to below as secondhand; n = 42). While parents who most frequently get their toys as hand-me-downs may take a less active selection of toys for their children than parents who actively choose used toys at a thrift store or garage sale, we chose to group these parents together because they are obtaining toys that likely do not have their packaging intact. For this reason, we believe this grouping of parents is justified.

We conducted a series of one-way analyses of variance (ANOVA) on maternal and family demographics as the dependent variables and primary source of toys as the independent variable to investigate fundamental differences among families. While running a large number of ANOVAs may lead to a false discovery rate (FDR), guidelines suggest that adjusting p-values of individual tests based on the fact that multiple independent tests are run is not common, easily carried out, or easily justified (Shaffer, 1995). We also applied a more conservative correction by using the Bonferroni adjustment.

Mothers with different primary sources for toys did not differ in age, education, or total number of children in the family. Chi-square tests revealed there were no differences in sources of toys by race or ethnicity. Therefore, the differences we observed reported below are likely not due to other broader differences in these family characteristics between the groups.

We then conducted ANOVAs with the three sources of toys as the independent variable and with the survey questions about what mothers consider, where they obtain their information, and manufacturer-related questions as the dependent variables. All ANOVAs that showed a difference between the most common source of toys on any given dependent variable at the p<.05 level are reported below (and all ANOVAS, even if not at the p<.05 level are reported in Table 2). Bonferroni post-hoc tests were used to determine which groups differed from each other and attempted to control for Type 1 error by correcting for pairwise comparisons. All relevant statistical information from these series of ANOVAs are reported in Table 2.

Table 2.

ANOVA results and mean scores survey questions broken down by primary toy source

Survey Question Primary Toy Source Mean Standard Deviation F Sig. η2
What Mothers Consider How often do you consider educational qualities of toys before buying? Stores 3.78 a 0.733 10.059 .000* .127
Online 4.37b 0.584
Secondhand 4.21b 0.682
How often do you consider safety of toys before buying? Stores 4.50a 0.599 0.201 .818 .003
Online 4.49a 0.817
Secondhand 4.40 a 0.857
How often do you consider visual appearance of toys before buying? Stores 3.70 a 0.791 0.094 .910 .001
Online 3.66 a 0.976
Secondhand 3.74 a 0.828
How often do you consider the popularity of toys before buying? Stores 2.60 a 0.778 3.638 .029* .050
Online 2.49ab 0.838
Secondhand 2.14b 0.814
How often do you consider the availability of toys before buying? Stores 2.88 a 0.966 2.155 .120 .030
Online 2.80a 1.156
Secondhand 2.40a 1.211
How often do you consider the price of toys before buying? Stores 4.33a 0.797 0.368 .693 .005
Online 4.19a 0.840
Secondhand 4.26a 0.734
How often do you consider whether or not child asked you to buy the toy before buying? Stores 3.63a 0.952 8.895 .000* .116
Online 2.91b 1.081
Secondhand 2.65b 1.189
How often do you consider the age of intended use of toys before buying? Stores 3.93a 0.859 3.427 .035* .047
Online 4.08ab 0.877
Secondhand 3.60b 1.061
How often do you consider the gender to which the toy is aimed before buying? Stores 3.05a 1.154 6.960 .001* .092
Online 2.29b 1.130
Secondhand 2.33b 0.874
How often do you consider race/culture/ethnicity depicted in the toy before buying? Stores 2.08a 0.917 0.864 .424 .012
Online 2.15a 1.096
Secondhand 2.38a 1.287
How often do you consider the durability of the toy before buying? Stores 3.80a 0.758 0.807 .448 .012
Online 3.85a 0.906
Secondhand 4.02a 0.869
How often do you consider the violence level of toys before buying? Stores 4.40a 0.871 0.074 .929 .001
Online 4.32a 1.041
Secondhand 4.36a 1.032
How often do you consider child’s skills and abilities before buying toys? Stores 4.18a 0.747 0.056 .946 .001
Online 4.17a 0.746
Secondhand 4.21a 0.565
How often do you consider child’s personality before buying toys? Stores 4.18a 0.874 0.152 .859 .002
Online 4.10a 0.941
Secondhand 4.07a 0.778
Where Mothers Get Information How often do you gather information about toys from other parents you know? Stores 2.78a 0.832 2.197 .115 .031
Online 3.12a 0.832
Secondhand 3.10a 0.906
How often do you gather info about toys from friends? Stores 2.60a 0.900 1.189 .308 .017
Online 2.86a 0.937
Secondhand 2.86a 0.872
How often do you gather info about toys from family (not including child)? Stores 2.30a 0.939 2.070 .130 .029
Online 2.69a 1.021
Secondhand 2.57a 0.859
How often do you gather info about toys from your child? Stores 3.23a 0.974 2.196 .115 .031
Online 2.80a 1.063
Secondhand 2.98a 0.924
How often do you gather info about toys from pediatricians/child development professionals? Stores 1.83a 0.844 0.711 .493 .010
Online 2.05a 1.090
Secondhand 2.00a 0.796
How often do you gather info about toys from parenting websites/blogs? Stores 2.68a 0.971 0.294 .746 .004
Online 2.81a 1.008
Secondhand 2.71a 0.774
How often do you gather info about toys from parenting listservs/online parenting communities? Stores 2.38a 1.079 1.479 .231 .021
Online 2.64a 1.047
Secondhand 2.74a 0.828
How often do you gather info about toys from internet reviews? Stores 3.20a 0.939 5.317 .006* .072
Online 3.75b 0.822
Secondhand 3.40ab 0.767
How often do you gather info about toys from advertising? Stores 2.60a 0.810 7.536 .001* .098
Online 2.10b 0.781
Secondhand 2.00b 0.663
How often do you gather info about toys from product catalogs? Stores 2.20a 0.939 2.463 .089 .034
Online 1.88a 0.790
Secondhand 1.81 a 0.862
How often do you gather info about toys from magazines? Stores 2.00a 0.816 0.479 .621 .007
Online 1.93a 0.763
Secondhand 1.83a 0.762
How often do you gather info about toys from newspapers? Stores 1.53a 0.716 3.954 .021* .054
Online 1.20b 0.406
Secondhand 1.40ab 0.627
How often do you gather info about toys TV shows? Stores 2.20a 0.823 12.689 .000* .155
Online 1.56b 0.676
Secondhand 1.50b 0.634
Manufacturer’s Suggested Age and Instructions How important is the manufacturer’s suggested age label on toys to you? Stores 3.33a 0.982 2.582 .079 .036
Online 3.24a 0.916
Secondhand 2.90a 0.821
How accurate do you think the suggested age label is? Stores 3.15a 0.779 1.156 .318 .017
Online 3.10a 0.687
Secondhand 2.93a 0.677
Do you read the manufacturer’s suggested age printed on toy labels? Stores 4.08a 0.917 0.241 .786 .003
Online 4.00a 1.000
Secondhand 3.93a 0.921
Do you read the directions that come with toys? Stores 3.80a 0.758 3.031 .052* .042
Online 3.71a 0.832
Secondhand 3.38b 0.882
Open in a new tab

Note.

*

= Difference between groups significant at p<.05 level. Means labeled with the same letter subscript are not significantly different from each other.

What Mothers Consider by Method of Toy Procurement

The largest survey differences were found between the most common source of toys on the mean score of (1) how often mothers consider educational qualities of toys (2) whether or not the child asked the mother to buy the toy and (3) gender between all three categories of toy procurement. Mothers who most often obtained toys from stores considered educational qualities less and considered their child’s requests to buy toys and the gender to which the toy is aimed more often than those who obtained toys primarily online or secondhand.

In addition, there was a difference between the most common source of toys on the mean score of how often mothers consider the popularity of toys and consideration of the age of intended use of the toy between store and secondhand shoppers. Mothers who obtained toys primarily from stores considered popularity of toys and age of intended use significantly more than those who purchased toys primarily secondhand. See Table 2.

Where Mothers Obtain Information by Toy Procurement

We investigated the difference in mean scores of where mothers obtain information about toys by what mothers identified as their most frequent source of their child’s toys. The largest survey difference found between all three categories of toy procurement was on the mean score of how often mothers obtain information from (1) advertising and (2) television shows. Mothers obtaining toys primarily from stores considered information from advertising and television shows more often than mothers obtaining toys primarily online or secondhand.

There was also a difference between most common source of toys on the mean score of how often mothers obtain information from (1) internet reviews and (2) newspapers between store and online shoppers. Mothers who primarily acquired toys from stores were less likely to obtain information from internet reviews and more likely to obtain information about toys from newspapers than online shoppers. See Table 2.

Manufacturer Suggested Age and Instructions by Toy Procurement

There was a marginal difference between the most common source of toys on reading the directions of toys. Mothers purchasing toys from stores were more likely to read the directions than those obtaining toys secondhand.

Discussion

This article is one of the first to investigate the landscape of parental toy procurement. Through the use of a survey, we were able to document four key pieces of information: (1) where parents obtain toys for their children, (2) what they consider when selecting toys, (3) where they obtain information about toys, and (4) how they regard manufacturers’ suggested ages for toys. In addition, we investigated how these four items differed between groups of parents who primarily obtain their toys from brick-and-mortar stores, online, or secondhand. Comparisons indicated there are indeed differences among these three groups on parental considerations and information sources, although no differences were observed in this survey in thoughts on manufacturers’ age.

One of the first major findings of the study was that parents cited buying toys online as the most frequent source of their children’s toys. Indeed, the results indicate the shift of parents moving to online avenues to purchase toys for their children, a result not surprising considering recent retail trends (Rizzo & Kapner, 2017; Thompson, 2018). The results reflect that parents prefer to buy toys with the click of a button, delivered directly to their door, with reviews of other buyers, at prices at or below those in a traditional store (Rosen, 2017; Smith & Anderson, 2016). After online shopping, the next most common sources of children’s toys were gifts, followed by secondhand sources (i.e., thrift stores, garage sales, hand-me-down). Setting aside gifts, where parents are not making active choices about the toy (other than potentially not allowing their child to play with the gifted toy), the top two methods of toy procurement—online shopping and secondhand—take away the opportunity for parents to physically handle the toy with the original packaging before purchasing the toy.

Regarding what parents consider when they purchase a toy, the results suggested that parents have a top interest in the educational qualities of the toy, mirroring the importance of education during play found in previous studies (Fisher et al., 2008), as well as the amount of value parents place on unstructured play that can benefit their child’s social and intellectual development (Gardener et al., 2012). Parents’ other chief concerns were finding toys suited to the individual child’s personality and skills. Surprisingly, a minority of parents cited safety as their most frequent consideration before buying a toy. Perhaps parents place a large amount of trust in existing U. S. Consumer Product Safety Commission regulations mandating toy safety (U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission, 2020), or maybe parents are confident that they will be able to monitor their child’s play and intervene if any unsafe situations arise when children play with any given toy.

Contrary to studies done before the internet age (Fallon & Harris, 1989), parents in the current study very rarely reported getting information from advertising. Yet, parents in the 2010s still turn to other parents for information about toys, just as they did for studies investigating where parents get data about health (with some of this research completed before the internet age) (Bornstein et al., 2010; Fallon & Harris, 1989; Kennedy et al., 2011; Tamis-LeMonda et al., 1998). Still, the internet is very important to how parents obtain information, with internet reviews topping the list as the most frequent information source about toys. Other online resources—like parenting websites, blogs, and online parenting communities, accounted for another sizeable proportion of toy information resources for parents. In sum, online resources constitute a large portion of where parents seek information, and online channels are a frequent information source.

Overall, very few parents viewed the manufacturers’ suggested age on the toy label as extremely important, and most considered it only somewhat accurate, which is similar to the results of older studies (Fallon & Harris, 1989). Still, most parents in our study read the manufacturers’ suggested age label as well as instructions coming with the toy either sometimes or often. Therefore, parents are aware of the manufacturers’ suggested use of a toy as well as the instructions, but they believe the accuracy is somewhat in doubt. Perhaps parents believe that their children can play with toys suggested for older ages, as found previously (Langlois et al., 1991). Or perhaps manufacturers are not confident in the toy’s ability to stand up to the level of testing needed to meet CPSC regulations for younger children, and label packaging with an older suggested age. In addition, it is possible that parents’ view of the manufacturers’ suggested age could differ depending on the exact age of the child—perhaps parents with children under the age of 3 are more aware of the manufacturers’ age than parents purchasing a toy for a 7-year-old, because the safety implications are greater for a younger child. Future research should examine this issue, unfortunately the current dataset cannot because mothers filled out the survey with all of her children in mind, and it is possible that she could have had different feelings when filling out the survey for her 2-year-old vs. her 5-year-old.

When we examined differences between groups of parents who identified different primary sources of toys, some notable findings emerged. First, parents buying toys from different sources appear to consider dissimilar issues when purchasing toys. Those purchasing toys primarily from brick-and-mortar stores were less likely to consider educational qualities, and more likely to consider the gender to which the toy is aimed and whether the child asked them to buy the toy, than parents identifying online or secondhand as their primary sources of toys. It is not surprising that children’s requests are more prominent for parents purchasing toys from stores, as children may often accompany parents to stores (Ebster et al., 2009; Valkenburg & Cantor, 2001). Perhaps the children’s requested toys are also less educational, explaining why educational qualities are less often considered for parents purchasing in brick-and-mortar stores. The increased likelihood of considering the gender to which the toy is aimed is in line with previous studies that collected data about gender-typed toys outside of a brick-and-mortar storefront (Fisher-Thompson, 1993). It is possible that parents purchasing toys at stores are more likely to be exposed to the toy’s packaging, which could carry gender-stereotyped themes.

In addition, parents buying toys primarily from stores seemed to value popularity of toys more compared to those purchasing them secondhand. It is possible this result appeared because those purchasing secondhand are buying older toys that are not the ‘hottest’ toy of the season. Finally, analyses revealed that purchasing toys secondhand meant that parents were less likely to consider the age of intended use, which is not surprising because secondhand toys typically come without packaging and the manufacturers’ suggested age is not readily available.

Method of toy procurement also possibly played a role in where parents are getting information about toys. As would be expected, those shopping online appeared to obtain information from the internet more often than those shopping in stores, although buying toys secondhand did not differ from the other two methods. Perhaps this lack of difference resulting from this survey data between online and secondhand shoppers stems from the possibility that parents who buy toys secondhand will try to find information about the toy online after purchasing it. Finally, parents shopping in stores seem to be more likely to obtain information from advertising and television shows than those citing online or secondhand as their primary toy sources. It is possible that toys featured on television and in advertisements are prominently displayed in brick-and-mortar stores more than the plethora of play materials available online, and this could contribute to these results.

Finally, there were differences found regarding the manufacturer’s suggested age and instructions. Store purchasers who seemed to read toy instructions more than secondhand (as the directions are typically not available in secondhand purchases), but no differences were observed in this study in online versus store purchasers. However, all other survey questions regarding the importance, accuracy and frequency of reading of manufacturers suggested age were regarded similarly among groups. The results may indicate that regardless of toy purchasing method, parents regard manufacturers’ recommended age labels similarly, although this difference should be interpreted with caution given that it was marginally significant, and there could be a chance of Type 1 error given the large number of ANOVAs conducted.

There are some limitations to the study. First, mothers were mostly highly educated and were limited in racial and ethnic diversity. Consequently, we do not know whether these results are generalizable to mothers with less education, racial and ethnic minorities, income groups, or to fathers buying toys. These demographic groups may value and seek information in different ways, as well as procure toys for their children in different places. Second, the survey asked parents about purchasing toys for their children more generally and as such, we could not pinpoint if their answers differed depending on which aged child would be using a particular toy. In addition, the response option of secondhand/hand-me-down for most frequent source of toys groups together parents who are essentially gifted used toys (i.e., hand-me-downs) versus those that actively choose used toys at consignment sales or thrift stores (i.e. secondhand). This leaves some ambiguity in the amount of agency that these parents typically have when giving their children used toys (e.g., if they actively or passively selected a toy for their child). Another limitation of the study is that even though we know that toys are purchased online—we do not know what type of online outlets are used. Buying a toy directly from a manufacturers’ website can provide different information about the toy than from second party sellers, who sometimes post incorrect or incomplete information about the toy. Also, this study ran a large number of ANOVAs, with a chance of Type 1 error present. Other studies should focus on just one aspect of this data to more fully elucidate the potential relationships that we found in this survey data. In addition, this study does not fully investigate why parents answered survey questions in the way that they did. We do not have information about why they purchase their toys from various sources, why they consider certain factors more than others, why they obtain their information from some sources more than others, and why they consider the manufacturers’ age recommendation in a certain way. In addition, we created this parent survey—it has not been used before, and we do not have any psychometric information. Future research should aim to investigate these limitations.

A policy implication of this research centers around the large number of parents in the sample purchasing toys online and secondhand, where labeling is either non-existent or not available to read before the toy is purchased. Guidance such as the suggested age of the toy directly from the manufacturer may be completely disregarded by a parent, leading a child into a potentially unsafe play situation. Perhaps laws could be enacted that require online retailers to post clear pictures of packaging, or perhaps toy manufacturers could print the suggested age and/or potential safety warnings that are currently printed on packages directly onto the toy themselves. Such measures could ensure that all toys, regardless of how they reach a child, are safe for play.

Children’s play is shaped by the types of toys that parents provide (Richards et al., under review). Today, parents can procure toys for their children in a variety of ways, particularly as online shopping has gained popularity. Parents want their toys to be educational and tailored to their child’s personality and skill level, will often turn to resources online to obtain more information about toys, and only sometimes take the manufacturers’ suggested age into account. It appears that parents who obtain their toys from different sources consider different issues before purchasing them, gather information about them in different ways, yet consider manufacturers’ recommendations in similar ways. This study imparts knowledge on a topic rarely studied, painting in a landscape of the reality of how parents fill their child’s toy box.

Highlights.

  • Parents most frequently obtain toys and information about toys online

  • Parents regularly consider the educational qualities of a toy before purchasing it

  • Parents obtaining toys from different sources differ in how they seek information

  • Regardless of purchase location, parents regard manufacturer suggestions similarly

Acknowledgments

We would like to thank Khalisa Phillips and Laura Bradley for their assistance with survey development and data collection. We also thank all parents and children who took the time to participate in our study.

This project has been funded with federal funds from the United States Consumer Product Safety Commission under agreement number CPSC-I-14-0016. The content of this publication does not necessarily reflect the views of the Commission, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement by the Commission. This research also was supported by the Intramural Research Program of the NIH/NICHD, USA, and an International Research Fellowship in collaboration with the Centre for the Evaluation of Development Policies (EDePO) at the Institute for Fiscal Studies (IFS), London, UK, funded by the European Research Council (ERC) under the Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (grant agreement No 695300-HKADeC-ERC-2015-AdG).

Footnotes

Publisher's Disclaimer: This is a PDF file of an unedited manuscript that has been accepted for publication. As a service to our customers we are providing this early version of the manuscript. The manuscript will undergo copyediting, typesetting, and review of the resulting proof before it is published in its final form. Please note that during the production process errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.

References

  1. Al Kurdi B (2017). Investigating the factors influencing parent toy purchase decisions: Reasoning and consequences. International Business Research, 10, 104–116. 10.5539/ibr.v10n4p104 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  2. Richards MN, Putnick DL, Bradley LP, Lang KM, Little TD, Suwalsky JTD, & Bornstein MH (under review). Children’s utilization of toys is moderated by age-appropriateness, toy category, and child age. [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed]
  3. Bornstein MH, Cote LR, Haynes OM, Hahn C-S, & Park Y (2010). Parenting knowledge: Experiential and sociodemographic factors in European American mothers of young children. Developmental Psychology, 46, 1677–1693. 10.1037/a0020677 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  4. U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (2020). Age determination guidelines: Relating consumer product characteristics to the skills, play behaviors, and interests of children. Washington, DC: Author; https://www.cpsc.gov/s3fs-public/pdfs/blk_media_adg.pdf [Google Scholar]
  5. Ebster C Wagner U, & Neumueller D (2009). Children’s influences on in-store purchases. Journal of Retailing and Consumer Services, 16, 145–154. 10.1016/j.jretconser.2008.11.005 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  6. Fallon MA & Harris MB (1989). Factors influencing the selection of toys for handicapped and normally developing preschool children. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 150, 125–134. 10.1080/00221325.1989.9914584 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  7. Fisher KR, Hirsh-Pasek K, Golinkoff RM, & Gryfe SG (2008). Conceptual split? Parents’ and experts; perceptions of play in the 21st century. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 29, 305–316. 10.1016/j.appdev.2008.04.006 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  8. Fisher-Thompson D (1993). Adult toy purchases for children: Factors affecting sex-typed toy selection. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 14, 385–406. 10.1016/0193-3973(93)90016-O [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  9. Flanagin AJ, Metzger MJ, Pure R, Markov A, & Hartsell E (2014). Mitigating risk in ecommerce transactions: Perceptions of information credibility and the role of user-generated ratings in product quality and purchase intention. Electronic Commerce Research, 14,1–23. 10.1007/s10660-014-9139-2 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  10. Gallup (2017). Time to play--A study on children’s free time: How it is spent, prioritized, and valued. Washington, DC: Author. [Google Scholar]
  11. Gardner M, Golinkoff RM, Hirsh-Pasek K & Heiney-Gonzalez D (2012). Marketing toys without playing around. Young Consumers, 13, 381–391. 10.1108/17473611211282626 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  12. Glassy D & Romano J (2003). Selecting appropriate toys for young children: The pediatrician’s role. Pediatrics, 111,911–913. 10.1542/peds.111.4.911 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  13. Hogan SP (2007). Toy stories, horror stories and fairy tales: The role of the media in highlighting issues of corporate responsibility. Young Consumers, 8, 94–100. 10.1108/17473610710757446 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  14. Kennedy A, Basket M, & Sheedy K (2011). Vaccine attitudes, concerns, and information sources reported by parents of young children: Results from the 2009 HealthStyles survey. Pediatrics, 127,S92–S99. 10.1542/peds.2010-1722N [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  15. Kollmayer M, Schultes MT, Schober B, Hodosi T, & Spiel C (2018). Parents’ judgments about the desirability of toys for their children: Associations with gender role attitudes, gender-typing of toys, and demographics. Sex Roles,79, 329–341. 10.1007/s11199-017-0882-4 [DOI] [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  16. Kulak S & Stein REK (2016). Toy age-labeling: An overview for pediatricians of how toys receive their age safety and developmental designations. Pediatrics, 138, e20151803 10.1542/peds.2015-1803 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  17. Langlois JA, Wallen BAR, Teret SP, Bailey LA, Hershey JH, & Peeler MO (1991). The impact of specific toy warning labels. Journal of the American Medical Association, 265,2848–2850. 10.1001/jama.1991.03460210094036 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  18. O’Cass A & Clarke P (2002). Dear Santa, do you have my brand? A study of the brand requests, awareness and request styles at Christmas time. Journal of Consumer Behavior, 2,37–53. 10.1002/cb.88 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  19. Rizzo L & Kapner S (2017). Toys ‘R’ Us, once a category killer, is forced into bankruptcy. The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved from https://www.wsj.com/articles/toys-r-us-once-a-category-killer-is-forced-into-bankruptcy-1505792620 [Google Scholar]
  20. Roggman LA, Langlois JH, & Hubbs-Tait L (1987). Mothers, infants, and toys: Social play correlates of attachment. Infant Behavior & Development, 10, 233–237. 10.1016/0163-6383(87)90037-3 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  21. Rosen RJ (2017). Toys aren’t us. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.theatlantic.com/business/archive/2017/09/toys-arent-us/540354/ [Google Scholar]
  22. Shaffer JP (1995). Multiple hypothesis testing. Annual Review of Psychology,46, 561–584. 10.1146/annurev.ps.46.020195.003021 [DOI] [Google Scholar]
  23. Smith A & Anderson M (2016). Online shopping and E-commerce. Pew Research Center. Retrieved from https://www.pewresearch.org/internet/2016/12/19/online-shopping-and-e-commerce/ [Google Scholar]
  24. Tamis-LeMonda CS, Chen LA, & Bornstein MH (1998). Mothers’ knowledge about children’s play and language development: Short-term stability and interrelations. Developmental Psychology, 34, 115–124. 10.1037/0012-1649.34.1.115 [DOI] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]
  25. Thompson D (2018). Who bankrupted Toys ‘R’ Us? Blame private equity and millennial parents. The Atlantic. Retrieved from https://www.scribd.com/article/369939366/Who-Bankrupted-Toys-R-Us-Blame-Private-Equity-And-Millennial-Parents [Google Scholar]
  26. Valkenburg PM & Cantor J (2001). The development of a child into a consumer. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 22, 61–72. 10.1016/S0193-3973(00)00066-6 [DOI] [Google Scholar]

RESOURCES