Is there a “right” amount of interactivity in children’s book apps?

Our guest post is written by  Shoham Drori, a mom-with-app from Tel-Aviv who created “The Magnificent Traveling Place” storybook. Her article addresses the debate on the purpose of interactivity in storybooks. Thanks Shoham!

Following 18 intensive months of producing my book app “The Magnificent Travelling Palace” I have finally reached the hardest part of promoting and marketing the app. As previous stages in the development, it is challenging, expensive, and filled with opportunities for mistakes. But in addition, for me, it is the most unpredictable part of the process.

So far the responses for the app were really great, showing a lot of enthusiasm and support. Nevertheless, one of the comments really stirred up my emotions. It said: We have decided not to review the app; our editor felt it was not interactive enough to fall under our review scope”.  A simple, sentence yet I found it to be a cause of concern.

The Magnificent Travelling Palaceis an experience-based app where you can move and drag the characters, paint, cause objects to fall by tilting the screen, learn new terms, prepare a sweet traditional Indian desert and many more interactive opportunities . Implying the interactions are not enough made me wonder how we interpret interactivity (and specifically, the way we interpret book app interactivity) in this era.

Why create an interactive book app? 

The last few years introduced us to amazing interactive devices creating a new reading experience for children. A storybook app can bring life to a written story by enhancing the sensory stimulating experience. In my case, my goal was to create an experience based story which will introduce children to exciting worlds of different cultures. When the iPad was first introduced, I understood this was the perfect platform for sharing the experience I was hoping the “magnificent travelling palace” would be.

Why stay nostalgic for regular books if we can create something new?! This is the essence of the term progress. We can enjoy both old and new worlds of book reading. Moreover, interactive books may be valued for their ability to prompt less motivated young readers toward books reading, communicating in their own new language of images and interactions. But what is the best way to incorporate these advantages? This is a complex controversial question.

Incorporate interactivity into a storybook app 

Generally, interactivity is a term representing the ability of a system to communicate with its operator. iPad is an interactive device, not only because the hardware interface includes sensitive touch screen, but because it enables almost a multi-sensory experience (excluding of course smell and taste which in some apps can be almost felt and imagined). The desire to incorporate the iPad’s abilities into book apps is executed via the narrow definition of the term interactivity. The more the child needs to touch the screen, the book app is considered more interactive and in direct correlation is considered to be of higher quality. But when touching the screen becomes the essence of the book’s experience, this is where developers, reviewers, and parents should take a standpoint.

What is wrong with nonstop screen touching in book apps? 

We live in a world filled with non-stop rapidly changing stimulation. Our children are flooded with non-relevant information. When it comes to apps, there are no exceptions. People tend to use apps in a hectic way,” jumping” between apps looking for interactions. When developing book apps there is a tendency to supply this demand for a non stop screen touching, while trying to tell a story. The story itself becomes a fair decoration for a game or continuous screen touching without any contribution to the storyline and its progression. This way, we are endowing our children with the same values of frantic behavior, lack of patience, tolerance, and ability to experience a storyline from its beginning to its end.

Researchers at the Joan Ganz Cooney Center wondered how enhanced e-books (e.g. iPad’s book apps) might relate to parent-child storytelling, otherwise known as co-reading. In there research they found that an enhanced e-book was less effective than the printed and basic e-book version in supporting the benefits of co-reading, because it prompted more non-content related interactions. Moreover, enhanced e-books distract adults and children alike from the story, affecting the nature of conversation and the amount of details children recall. Children who read enhanced e-books recalled significantly fewer narrative details than children who read the printed version of the same story.

Is there a right thing to do?

I can’t make a general conclusion representing every aspect of this issue, but I can share with you my beliefs. I strongly believe in preserving the balance between books in their classic form and integrating the amazing advantages introduced by the iPad. “Classic” form  means to stay loyal to the benefits of books reading like social and /or emotional values and benefits, sense of adventure, imagination and the integration of positive literacy experience, storytelling, and imaginative thinking. Doing this means that if an active “interaction” does not create another dimension through which the child can deepen his/hers experience, then it is unnecessary.

There is no need in trying to add more and more of these unnecessary interactions.  When children focus only on touching the screen looking for the next interaction, the story and values it represents lose their meaning, turning a possibly good children’s book into another interactive non-stop touching activity. When creating a new app we should examine our choices inside the context we live in, not just reflect an existing hectic realty, but rather create a better one. Let us try to do our best creating an interactive reading experience which combines not only story related screen touching but also high quality illustrations, appropriate music, sounds and narration, stimulating the imagination while creating emotional empathy during the story reading process.

5 Replies to “Is there a “right” amount of interactivity in children’s book apps?”

  1. Enjoyed reading this blog – I agree that interactivity brings a lot of new opportunities, but there’s no point including it if it distracts from the story!

  2. “we are endowing our children with the same values of frantic behavior, lack of patience, tolerance, and ability to experience a storyline from its beginning to its end.”

    Could not agree more! I do think the Joan Ganz Cooney study is overly sensationalist given the tiny sample size etc, but the underlying point is a good one. Far too many kids apps focus on sizzle over substance – endless and meaningless interactivity not meaningful engagement.

    But… and this is a problem… that is what many parents expect. Many parents (and app buyers in general) have the perception that more features equals more value.

    Those of you crafting “simpler” apps know just how hard it is to keep things simple, but what most buyers perceive is “fewer features” not “carefully crafted to be right for your child”.

    I think this is particularly true for preschool apps. Most parents (and I include myself here) are amazed at what will entertain their kids. Things that I would have thought too simple, too boring or otherwise unlikely have been a big hit.

    Given that most apps are an impulse purchase, I’m not sure how we help educate parents on the right thing to do for their child… But posts like this one certainly help.

  3. I enjoyed reading your interresting post and I agree with everything you wrote .I have been teaching kids for over 30 years and I have come to the conclusion that children are stimulated by competition.Even a very small child wants to earn something,he doesn’t know about tolerance and values he wants to be “the best”even if he competes with a virtual operator.(my grandchildren get excited when they earn stars or points in computer-games)
    Wouldn’t it make apps. more atractive for kids, could a feature like this be added?

  4. Couldn’t agree more – if the activity isn’t relevant to the story, then the app is a game and not a book that tells a memorable story. My advice for authors/developers? When in doubt, simplify.
    Little Robot/Kathleen Marie

  5. I’m struggling with the interactivity question as well for my upcoming app, One Globe Kids. I like being able to include certain features, such as sound, recording, etc, but I feel strongly that it should also be simple. Otherwise it’s not a book-reading experience but more like a game or even like TV, where the child doesn’t have to interact but is simply entertained. The app isn’t released yet so right now I’m just trusting that I’m on the right path and hope others will think so as well.

    Love the Magnificient Travelling Palace – introducing kids to new places and sounds is one of the best perks of app books, I think. Something I’m hoping to do as well. Would love to talk with you sometime, Shoham.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *