Purpose This article reports a case-study-based evaluation of a digital game designed to teach children about English law and children's rights with a sample of 12 children aged 3–6 years. Design/methodology/approach To evaluate the extent to which each child benefitted from the game, we developed three play-based activities that would enable the children to demonstrate growth in their legal competence. Findings . There was some evidence that the game positively impacted the majority of the children's knowledge regarding understanding when a situation was problematic and who can help them. There was also evidence that repeated engagement with the same scenarios over time was important in cementing the children's new knowledge. Adults were required to support the children's engagement with and navigation of the game, raising some concerns about whether the game was suitable for children in the age group to play independently. There was less evidence that the children were also able to apply their new knowledge or demonstrate confidence in escalating tricky situations, but this may be because children needed extended gameplay or a secure knowledge base before these competencies could emerge. Research limitations/implications This article demonstrates that it is possible to undertake a robust evaluation of an educational intervention using a form of play-based data elicitation which is incorporated into individual case studies, and then interrogated using cross-case analysis. Practical implications There is evidence that children in the early years may benefit from interacting with digital game environments to help them to understand their rights. Social implications By increasing children's rights awareness, we hope that even the youngest children may be able to recognise when a situation is a problem, and seek appropriate support. Originality/value To our knowledge, this is one of the first studies of its kind to show that a digital game can support the development of legal capability in children aged 3–6 years.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Magkafa et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: