You’re cooking dinner with your favorite person who objects to how much garlic you’re using. You are about to get annoyed, but decide to reality-check it first. You realize it’s not worth it, and decide to get goofy instead. You explain that their opinion has been noted and rejected. They’re a quick thinker (why they are your favorite), so they immediately bounce that they’re taking the matter to a higher authority. Within seconds, you’re defending your garlic policy before an fictional parliamentary committee, and dinner is late because neither of you can finish a sentence without laughing. An ordinary clash became an opportunity not to be an asshat. A potential dispute gone the most right way possible.
The urge to lighten up comes from what we call the PLAY system: one of the evolutionarily ancient emotional systems we share with other mammals. These systems generate feelings and impulses that organize your behavior around problems of living. PLAY is the one that makes it fun to test your abilities, experiment with unfamiliar situations, and learn how to handle other people, and what other people will let you get away with.
What is the messing around good for?
You know the drill. If nature installed it, it must play a role. It does.
Young mammals, for no obvious reason, spend considerable time chasing, wrestling, and ambushing one another. These activities consume energy and sometimes cause injuries. A youngster absorbed in wrestling may also fail to notice something approaching that has rather malicious intentions. So, where’s the catch; what is all this good for? Your childhood playground offers a clue. You tried things you couldn’t yet reliably do, discovered how hard you could push, and occasionally found yourself upside down without a plan. Other children introduced complications you couldn’t control. They changed the rules, resisted your brilliant ideas, or decided they wanted to be the dragon this time.
PLAY provides a kind of sandbox: a setting in which an animal can experiment with actions and relationships at lower stakes to master how to act at higher stakes later. In the sandbox, mistakes have consequences, but usually more manageable ones than they would in a serious endeavor. For a social mammal, that is crucial preparation in navigating the environment; their community. Our ancestors survival depended on living with others, and their offspring’s survival on acquiring a mate. They needed ways to pursue their interests among individuals who had interests of their own, some of whom were stronger and remarkably unenthusiastic about doing everything our ancestors’ way. They’ve shaped these ways trough play.
The experimentation extends to emotionally charged situations. You can stage a confrontation, pretend to abandon someone, or play an outrageously entitled character while both of you understand that the situation is invented. You get to explore a response without accepting all the consequences of acting it out seriously.
This “as if” quality is also associated with symbolic thought: play lets you try out possibilities through simulated action. Your imaginary parliamentary committee works because the accusations and threats remain for mutual enjoyment. If your cooking companion starts genuinely questioning your intelligence, the garlic hearing may become a relationship discussion.
Learning what you can get away with
PLAY has a prominent role in the formation of social hierarchies. It helps participants discover socially tolerable behavior and experiment with positions of authority and submission. You can observe that in pretend games particularly: someone plays the teacher, someone the pupil; someone gives orders, someone decides whether to obey. These interactions help establish relationships and the rules governing them.
Physical play also brings differences in power into the interaction. Play involves a mixture of competition and cooperation: animals may restrain their movements, give up an advantage, or reverse roles. The amount of reciprocity varies across species and circumstances, but accommodating a partner helps sustain the game. Imagine wrestling with someone you can effortlessly pin to the floor. You could keep them there. Congratulations: you’ve won, and now nobody is having any fun. Letting them escape creates another round, which may be more enjoyable than exercising your undisputed right to sit on them.
This dependence on another participant is associated with the development of empathy. Wanting the interaction to continue gives you a reason to notice how it feels for someone else. PLAY is also linked with the emergence of social rules: pursuing your own satisfaction requires some accommodation of other people’s needs.
There’s the adult versions of this: Can you follow someone else’s lead without feeling diminished? Can you enjoy being in charge without insisting on permanent jurisdiction? Can someone tease you without paying for it afterward? If your PLAY network works, a joke can ease the tension, calm you down, or make a challenging situation less agonizing.
What PLAY feels like and where it fires in the brain
You know your PLAY emotions come live when you feel lively, jolly, cheerful, flirty, and spirited. The clearest experimental example of the behavior associated with play is physical social play, especially rough-and-tumble play in young animals. Humor, improvisation, and games are more elaborate activities, shaped by learning and culture. PLAY contributes to the pleasure of fooling around and can be involved in basically everything you do then you take things lightly.
PLAY depends on interacting brain regions rather than one neatly isolated “fun center.” Research implicates subcortical structures, including parts of the thalamus and striatum, working with frontal cortical regions. Endogenous opioids and endocannabinoids help make social play rewarding, while dopamine contributes to the motivation to pursue it.
The distinction between the urge to play and the ability to play appropriately matters. An animal needs motivation to approach a partner, but it also needs to adjust its behavior as the interaction unfolds. The cortex helps with that adjustment. In rats, juvenile play experiences influence the development of prefrontal circuitry and later social flexibility; research suggests that the reciprocal quality of those experiences matters, beyond simply getting plenty of exercise.
Your brain therefore enables play because it learns through it. The enjoyable interaction supplies its own reason to practice.
How much fun can you handle?
Low PLAY is associated with less pleasure, more withdrawal, poorer social functioning, and greater psychological distress. Higher PLAY generally goes with an outgoing temperament, greater life satisfaction, stronger relationships, and more resilient coping. The findings give us considerably more reason to worry about too little PLAY than about a generous appetite for it [1–4].
With low PLAY, you feel less inclined to initiate playful interaction and get less enjoyment from joining in. Someone makes an absurd suggestion, and you see little reason to develop it. Their invitation to mess around feels like an interruption; you would quite happily get on with making dinner. You lose access to an everyday source of pleasure, and when play is how the people around you connect, you participate less in that connection too. This pattern is prominent in depression. Depressed adults score lower on PLAY than healthy controls, while depressed children show less enjoyment and involvement in play, more solitary-passive activity, and less sharing and communication during it. Children with anxiety disorders also show lower PLAY, alongside lower SEEKING and higher FEAR and SADNESS. Across broader samples, lower PLAY accompanies greater psychological distress and depressive symptoms [2, 5, 6].
The developmental cost extends to social competence. Playing gives you repeated opportunities to discover how other people respond, handle frustration, and adjust your behavior without abandoning the interaction. With fewer of those experiences, you get less practice. Animal studies demonstrate the consequences of deprivation: juvenile play deprivation increased later stress vulnerability and submissive or defensive behavior, while even an hour of daily play with a partner rescued defeat-related social changes [7]. In children, pretend-play training improves emotion comprehension and reduces aggression, while social pretend-play tutoring improves social behavior and peer relationships [8–10]. The stakes therefore include how well you can manage yourself in the company of other people, especially when they become inconvenient. Higher PLAY generally makes that company more rewarding. Across 21 samples, PLAY was strongly associated with extraversion; other studies connect playfulness with positive emotion, engagement, and well-being. In romantic relationships, it is associated with greater closeness, intimacy, and relationship satisfaction [1, 11, 12]. Having someone who will enthusiastically participate in your nonsense is a considerable relationship asset.
The benefits also extend to coping. More playful people show more resilient coping and more active, enjoyable engagement in everyday activities, while lighthearted playfulness is associated with lower perceived stress [4, 13]. Being able to play with a situation gives you more ways to respond to it. An inconvenience can become material for a shared joke; an unfamiliar task can become an experiment you’re willing to botch.
Trouble starts when playfulness clashes with the circumstances. Whimsical playfulness shows a small positive association with stress and can fit poorly in structured settings, even while lighthearted playfulness is associated with less stress [13]. You keep the joke going after your partner has asked for a serious answer, or turn a routine meeting into an improvisation nobody else signed up for. Your enjoyment remains intact while everyone else starts looking for an exit. Play also accommodates competition and the testing of power. It can involve tension, resemble aggression, and shade into dominance displays or conflict management [14]. With a strong desire to keep playing you therefore also need the ability to notice if you are pushing it too far.
In general, high PLAY will serve you well. But there is a but. If you turn everything into a joke, other people may struggle to get a serious response from you: they tell you something painful, raise a complaint, or ask for a commitment, and you turn it into material. They can end up feeling dismissed or exposed, especially when the joke recruits an audience. Humor also gives you an escape from accountability: you can make a hostile remark, test a boundary, or express something you want, then retreat into “I was only joking” when the response becomes uncomfortable. Over time, people may enjoy your company while trusting you less with anything that matters. You can lose something yourself, too: if disappointment or embarrassment immediately becomes a punchline, there’s little opportunity to understand what upset you or decide what to do about it. You should be able to stop joking when you or someone else needs the conversation to go somewhere serious.
Which games are worth playing?
PLAY helps you learn how to pursue what you want among people who have wants of their own. You discover how far you can push, when to yield, and how to remain someone others want to engage with. But becoming good at the group’s games doesn’t make those games worth playing. You can understand a hierarchy perfectly well and decide that climbing it would consume years you would rather spend doing something else. Evolution has its reasons for making status rewarding, but you still get to consider whether the rewards are worth the trouble.
Another question is how freely you can participate. Can you lose without feeling diminished, let someone else lead, or risk being ridiculous without spending the next three days reviewing the incident? And can you stop entertaining people when you have something serious to say, trusting that your company will still be wanted? Being funny can become exhausting or annoying when you believe it’s the only thing you turn to.
In psychoanalysis, we examine if your PLAY makes your life difficult. Perhaps losing a game feels like confirmation that you’re inferior, or a joke at your expense brings back the familiar experience of being humiliated. Perhaps you turn hurt into humor so quickly that even the people closest to you rarely find out what bothers you. Understanding those expectations, and working through the experiences that sustain them, can give you more choice about how you respond.
References
[1] Marengo, D., Davis, K. L., Özkarar Gradwohl, G., & Montag, C. (2021). A meta-analysis on individual differences in primary emotional systems and Big Five personality traits. Scientific Reports, 11(1), Article 7453. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-84366-8
[2] Faustino, B., Fonseca, I., & Oliveira, J. (2025). Brief form of the Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales: Preliminary psychometric properties in a European Portuguese community sample. Psychological Reports, 128(5), 3853–3871. https://doi.org/10.1177/00332941231202016
[3] Davis, K. L., & Montag, C. (2024). Jaak Panksepp’s primary emotions are associated with Diener’s global life satisfaction: How low arousal of the SADNESS/separation distress system could form the core of life satisfaction? Personality Neuroscience, 7, Article e11. https://doi.org/10.1017/pen.2024.4
[4] Shen, X., & Crawley, Z. (2025). How does playfulness (re)frame the world? Evidence for selective cognitive and behavioral redirecting in times of adversity. Frontiers in Psychology, 15, Article 1462980. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2024.1462980
[5] Talarowska, M., Wysiadecki, G., & Chodkiewicz, J. (2022). Affective Neuroscience Personality Scales and early maladaptive schemas in depressive disorders. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 19(13), Article 8062. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph19138062
[6] Cupellaro, S., Colonnello, V., Sabatello, U., Ubertini, C., & Sogos, C. (2025). Affective Neuroscience Personality Scale (ANPS) in children with internalizing disorders. Pediatric Reports, 17(3), Article 55. https://doi.org/10.3390/pediatric17030055
[7] Whitten, C. J., Kelly, J. R., Gillespie, A. L., Brooks, H. J. B., Hooker, M. K., Temple, A. R., Hennon, L. M., Kilgore, B. J., Singamaneni, Y. B., Schulz, K. M., Burghardt, G. M., & Cooper, M. A. (2025). From play date to stress fate: Juvenile social play rescues stress-induced changes in adult social behavior. Developmental Psychobiology, 67(1), Article e70020. https://doi.org/10.1002/dev.70020
[8] Richard, S., Baud-Bovy, G., Clerc-Georgy, A., & Gentaz, E. (2021). The effects of a ‘pretend play-based training’ designed to promote the development of emotion comprehension, emotion regulation, and prosocial behaviour in 5- to 6-year-old Swiss children. British Journal of Psychology, 112(3), 690–719. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjop.12484
[9] Richard, S., Clerc-Georgy, A., & Gentaz, E. (2023). Pretend play-based training improves some socio-emotional competences in 5–6-year-old children: A large-scale study assessing implementation. Acta Psychologica, 238, Article 103961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.actpsy.2023.103961
[10] Jaggy, A.-K., Kalkusch, I., Burkhardt Bossi, C., Weiss, B., Sticca, F., & Perren, S. (2023). The impact of social pretend play on preschoolers’ social development: Results of an experimental study. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 64, 13–25. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.01.012
[11] Farley, A., Kennedy-Behr, A., & Brown, T. (2021). An investigation into the relationship between playfulness and well-being in Australian adults: An exploratory study. OTJR: Occupation, Participation and Health, 41(1), 56–64. https://doi.org/10.1177/1539449220945311
[12] Aune, K. S., & Wong, N. C. H. (2002). Antecedents and consequences of adult play in romantic relationships. Personal Relationships, 9(3), 279–286. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6811.00019
[13] Sendatzki, R., Brauer, K., & Proyer, R. T. (2026). Playful minds under pressure? Exploring links between playfulness, stress, and satisfaction in employees and students. Healthcare, 14(4), Article 431. https://doi.org/10.3390/healthcare14040431
[14] Cordoni, G., & Norscia, I. (2024). Nuancing ‘emotional’ social play: Does play behaviour always underlie a positive emotional state? Animals, 14(19), Article 2769. https://doi.org/10.3390/ani14192769
Leave a Reply