IMAGINARY COMPANIONS

When you were a child, did you have an imaginary companion? Chances are you did.
Children often create an imaginary companion (IC) in their preschool years. In fact, they often become a regular part of the child's daily routines and play. Research shows that we need not be worried when a child creates such imaginary entities. It is perfectly normal.
According to Dr. Marjorie Taylor, "In the past a child with an imaginary companion might have been considered peculiar, shy or even troubled. The reality is much more positive---and interesting." Dr. Taylor is a professor of psychology at the University of Oregon and author of IMAGINARY COMPANIONS AND THE CHILDREN WHO CREATE THEM (Oxford University Press, 1999). (1)
Dr. Taylor notes that "imaginary companions are surprisingly common. Up to 65 per cent of children have them".
It isn't just in the minds of young children that they exist. Sometimes children as late as in early adolescence experience them. In a University of Leicester study of 1800 children aged between 5 and 12 years of age, it was found that 829 (46.2%) reported that they had experienced an imaginary companion. (2)
Based upon her research, Dr. Taylor claims that "the children who imagine companions tend to be less shy than their peers. They also are better able to focus their attention and see things from another person's perspective."
In any case, there is no significant behavioral science evidence that a child creating an IC has any psychological problem.
Of course, if a person keeps their IC into adulthood, that's abnormal---and extremely rare. That would be more like the film "Harvey" (1950) where a man befriends an adult-sized imaginary rabbit than the film "Drop Dead Fred" (1991) where an imaginary prankster returns to haunt a young woman's life.
In 1934, a psychiatrist by the name of Svendsen was the first to define "imaginary companion". That definition is still the one most often used today. An IC is "an invisible character, named and referred to in conversation with other persons or played with directly for a period of time, at least several months, having an air of reality for the child but no apparent objective basis." (3)
Subsequent research has established a surprisingly escalating rate of people who report that when they were children they had an IC. In the 1930s, the percentage was about 10 to 15 per cent. In the 1970s, this figure rose to 13 to 29 per cent. In the early 1990s, the percentage rose again to 33 per cent. According to Dr. Taylor, now the figure is 65 per cent.
Why this increase? Perhaps there is not really an increase in the experience of an IC, but merely an increase in reporting it due to less stigma attached to having an IC. But perhaps there is an increase in the IC experience because children in recent years are more likely to live in smaller families with fewer siblings. This scarcity of real companions may bring about the necessity of inventing imaginary one.
Although early studies suggested that girls may be more likely to have an IC, later studies suggest that boys are probably just as likely to imagine a companion as girls. The majority of studies lead to the conclusion that
only children are somewhat more likely to have an imaginary companion. However, they do not seem to retain this companion any longer than do non-singletons.
The bulk of studies also suggest that there is no clear-cut relationship between intelligence or creativity and the creation of an imaginary companion. We used to think that particularly intelligent or creative children were more likely to imagine a companion, but we now think that this is not so.
Why do children create ICs? Children probably do this to gain competence in and mastery of their world. This is called "effectance motivation"--a desire to interact competently and effectively in one's own environment. This is why the IC is so often involved in the child's play and daily routines. It is in these realms that the child practices and experiments in order gain mastery. As University of Denver psychologists, Drs. Susan Harter and Christine Chao write, an IC "can psychologically assist the child to overcome or compensate for feelings of inadequacy or lack of competence." (4)
The child's desire for competence and mastery, largely explains why the IC usually comes in one of two forms. It is either "a friend" who is more competent than the child or one who is less competent. As Drs. Harter and Chao explain, when the imaginary companion is more competent than the child "the friend represents the projected wishes of the child to be competent. According to this model, the imaginary friend functions as an ego-ideal, as it were, such that the child can identify with the powerful or competent companion." Thus, the child creates a person that can do the things that the child cannot do as yet but certainly wants to do as a form of "wish fulfilment". On the other hand, when the imaginary companion is less competent than the child, Drs. Harter and Chao explain that this bolsters "the child's own sense of competence in comparison to the imaginary friend. Not only would this friend allow the child to appear more masterful, but to demonstrate this mastery by aiding or assisting one's less competent friend. Such dynamics are consistent with the mechanism of 'role reversal' in children's play, whereby children assume the role of a more powerful or competent figure (e.g., a parent or teacher figure), casting other play characters into the role of a child (that is typically assumed to represent the self)." Simply put, the weaker friend can be lorded over or helped by the child. This makes the child feel better about themselves. In addition, this desire for competency and mastery helps explain why children also love super hero forms of play at about the same age as when they are most likely to create imaginary companions. And it also helps explain why children love playing with big trucks. And this also partially explains why children love dinosaurs. They're big, powerful, and are the masters of their world. It's what the child would love to be but obviously isn't. (5)
Yet an IC can serve other functions too. According to Drs. Lorraine Ball and Kimberley Wright Cassidy from Bryn Mawr College and Dr. Christopher Lalonde from Victoria University in British Columbia, the IC falls into one of seven categories:
1) Control. The IC serves as something to control, take charge of, parent, boss around, etc.
2) Companion. The IC provides companionship and alleviates loneliness.
3) Nurturance. The IC provides comfort, understanding, support, unconditional love, and dependability.
4) Emotional outlet. The IC expresses emotions the child can't express or facilitates the expression of emotion.
5) Alter Ego. The IC is or does things the child can't do or takes blame for the child.
6) Facilitates Fantasy. The IC provides a vehicle for fantasy play and fuels the child's imagination.
7) Guidance. The IC gives advice and helps the child work through problems or emotions. (6)
Research and clinical experience has found that an IC sometimes becomes part of the family, requiring their own chair at the dinner table and their own space in the child's bed. The child will often want the IC to be brought into all family activities--as a sibling. But all this is temporary. The normal scenario is that usually sometime soon after the child starts to regularly attend preschool or "big" school, the IC ceases to exist. Real companions displace the imaginary ones.
Additional research findings about ICs include:
* 91.5 per cent of ICs have a name.
* 72 per cent of ICs take human form.
* 83 per cent are believed by the child to really feel,
hear, see, think, know, or act.
* ICs are described as having a greater influence on the
child by the child than by the child's parent. (6)
* IC occurs in many cultures throughout the world (for
example, in Japan). (7)

(1) Taylor, M. (1999) IMAGINARY COMPANIONS AND THE CHILDREN WHO CREATE THEM. Melbourne: Oxford University Press, (pp. 1-2).
(2) Pearson, D. Rouse, H. Doswell, S. Ainsworth, C. Dawson, O. Simms, K. Edwards, L. Faulconbridge, J. (2001) Prevalence Of Imaginary Companions In A Normal Child Population. CHILD CARE HEALTH DEVELOPMENT 27:1:13-22.
(3) Svendsen, M. (1934) Children's Imaginary Companions. ARCHIVES OF NEUROLOGY AND PSYCHIATRY 2:985-999, (p. 985)
(4) Harter, S. Chao, C. (1992) The Role Of Competence In Children's Creation Of Imaginary Friends. MERRILL-PALMER QUARTERLY 38:350-363, (pp. 351; 352).
(5) Taylor, M. Cartwright, B. Carlson, S. (1993) A
Developmental Investigation Of Children's Imaginary Companions. DEVELOPMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY 29:276-285, (p. 276).
(6) Ball, L. Wright Cassidy, K. Lalonde, C. (1998)
Virtual Research On Imaginary Companions: Using The Internet To Gather Adult Retrospective Accounts Of Imaginary Companions In Childhood. Paper Presented At The 28th Annual Symposium Of The Jean Piaget Society, Chicago, Illinois, June 11-13, 1998.
(7) Sawa, T. Oae, H. Abinu, T. Furuhashi, T. (2002)
Imaginary Companions in Adolescence. SEISHIN SHINKEIGAKU ZASSHI 104:3:210-220.

 

 

Complete News Archives: 2003 November: How to become a genuis October: Cryptohumans September: Sex & Gender Trivia August: What's in our Future? July: Self-Cannibalism June: This Will Kill Ya May: Still more of What's New about The Odd Body and Brain March: About Face February: Why we are all brothers and sisters January: The "Curse" That Won't Die 2002 December: Why is your face so red? November: How to be creative October: The Little Differences Between Men and Women September: The Mars Effect August: Weird mysteries of creative giants July: How many senses do we have? June: The Samson Syndrome May: Phantom Limb Syndrome April: Can we talk to the unborn? March: Movie Revelations February: Navel Secrets January: If Whales Can Do It? 2001 December: Body Odysseys of the Famous November: The Psychology of Smell October: Light, Colour and Music Therapy September: Three Brain Mysteries August: Baldness July News June: Laughing