What Happens When Preschoolers Play Cooperative vs. Competitive Board Games?

Board games are a childhood staple, a social ritual that goes far beyond just rolling dice and moving pieces. But have you ever stopped to wonder if a game like Snakes and Ladders shapes a child differently than a cooperative treasure hunt? A fascinating study by Eriksson, Kenward, Poom, and Stenberg (2021) put this question to the test, and the results might challenge some deeply held assumptions about play.

The Study at a Glance

The research, formally titled "The behavioral effects of cooperative and competitive board games in preschoolers," meticulously observed 65 children between the ages of 4 and 6. Over a period of six weeks, small groups of four children repeatedly played either a cooperative board game, where the goal is a shared victory, or a competitive one, where there’s a clear winner and loser. Shortly after each play session, the researchers observed the children in a different task to see if the game's nature had any immediate, measurable impact on their behavior.

The Core Finding: It’s Less About Winning Than We Think

Here’s the twist: the study found that the type of board game—cooperative or competitive—did not have a direct effect on cooperative, prosocial, or antisocial behavior in the task that followed. A competitive game didn't churn out more aggressive kids, and a cooperative one didn't instantly create a team of angels.

What did happen, however, was that children displayed equal amounts of cooperative and prosocial behavior after both game types. The one notable observation was that children might show more competitive behavior after playing a competitive game, though the researchers themselves flagged the reliability of that specific measurement as a point of caution.

This doesn't mean games don't matter—it simply means their influence is more nuanced. The real magic might be in the shared experience itself.

The Hidden Superpower: Practicing Life Skills

Whether a child is working with teammates to beat a clock or racing to the finish line against friends, every board game is a structured social microcosm. Both formats demand the same fundamental skills:

• Waiting Your Turn: A cornerstone of impulse control.
• Following a Set of Rules: The bedrock of social and moral development.
• Responding to Peers’ Actions: Constant, real-time social calibration.

These elements provide children with a low-stakes environment to practice behavioral control and social interaction. It’s not the winning or losing that's the primary teacher, but the process of playing fairly with others. This interpretation aligns with broader findings that even competitive games can boost prosocial behaviors like sharing and helping in a play context. On the flip side, other research suggests that a purely competitive context can sometimes reduce sharing immediately afterward, highlighting how sensitive behavior is to the environment.

Correcting the Record: The Full Citation

The source you're looking for is definitively Eriksson, Kenward, Poom, & Stenberg (2021). A small but important correction: the author you noted as "tenberg" is Gunilla Stenberg.

Here is the complete citation in APA 7th Edition format for your reference list:

Eriksson, M., Kenward, B., Poom, L., & Stenberg, G. (2021). The behavioral effects of cooperative and competitive board games in preschoolers. Scandinavian Journal of Psychology, 62(3), 355–364. https://doi.org/10.1111/sjop.12708

For In-Text Citations:

• Parenthetical: (Eriksson, Kenward, Poom, & Stenberg, 2021)
• Narrative: Eriksson, Kenward, Poom, and Stenberg (2021) found that...
• Subsequent citations: (Eriksson et al., 2021)

Limitations and a Grain of Salt

It's crucial to note the study's own boundaries. The finding that the immediate type of game didn't drastically change behavior doesn't override the entire body of research. Other studies have shown that a competitive setting can increase aggression or decrease sharing in some children. The key takeaway is context-dependent. A six-week study with a specific set of board games and 65 Swedish preschoolers gives us a vital piece of the puzzle, not the whole picture.

The Bottom Line

So, should you ban competitive games or force your preschooler into a cooperative utopia? The evidence from Eriksson et al. (2021) says probably not. The deeper value lies in the act of playing together. Whether working in unison or in friendly rivalry, children are learning the fundamental dance of social life—how to wait, how to follow a shared reality of rules, and how to handle themselves when interacting with others. The board game, in any flavor, might just be one of the oldest and most effective social toolkits we have.