Assessing the Suitability of Children’s Rides and Activities: Cognitive Skills and Motor Function Must Match the Intended User

Introduction

In the amusement and active leisure industries, eligibility for rides and activities is commonly determined by physical measures such as height and mass and, in some cases, by the expected user’s ergonomic suitability. However, many rides and activities do not allow adult participation, meaning the child is the sole participant.

Manufacturers often specify a minimum age for use on certain rides, activities, or areas, typically correlating this with height, mass, and ergonomics. These decisions are usually based on physical dimensions rather than on developmental readiness. As a result, some rides and active leisure areas may be accessible or designed for very small children whose cognitive skills and motor functions have not yet matured enough to allow them to recognise, assess, or respond to risks effectively.

The purpose of this paper is to highlight the importance of aligning design and eligibility criteria with children’s developmental stages. By referencing established psychological theories, such as Piaget’s Stages of Cognitive Development, and available growth and development data, this report encourages manufacturers, inspectors, and regulators to ensure that children’s rides and active leisure devices are appropriate for the intended user’s developmental capabilities, not just their physical size. It is intended to promote developmentally informed safety decisions within the industry.

The Problem: Height and Mass Are Not Enough

To understand what developmental suitability looks like in practice, consider these contrasting examples:

A ride that involves rapid changes in direction, where users must actively balance, is likely unsuitable for children under 5, whose motor skills and response times are not yet fully developed.

By contrast, a seated ride with harnesses or guided movement may be appropriate for a younger age group, provided cognitive skills like following simple instructions are present.

Developmental readiness is not about age alone: it is about the capacity to recognise danger, respond appropriately, and remain physically stable during movement. These are essential considerations when evaluating the true suitability of a ride or activity.

Height and mass are easily measurable but do not represent a child’s ability to recognise hazards or physically prevent injury. For example, a 3-year-old child may meet a height requirement but lack the cognitive development to assess danger or the motor control to stabilize themselves during abrupt movement.

Where adult assistance is not permitted, reliance on height alone poses safety risks.

Children must be independently capable of:

1. Recognising and evaluating risk.
2. Reacting appropriately to avoid harm.
3. Maintaining physical control during the activity.

Research by Morrongiello and Lasenby-Lessard (2007) found that young children often fail to perceive environmental hazards, and risk perception only becomes reliable with age and experience.

Cognitive Development and Risk Awareness in Physical Activities

Children’s ability to assess and respond to risks develops with age and is influenced by physical activity and environmental interaction. Research indicates that cognitive development, especially executive function (decision-making, problem-solving, risk assessment), improves through engagement with physical activities.

A systematic review by Zeng et al. (2017) highlighted that physical activity in early childhood positively influences cognitive development, particularly in areas such as language learning, academic achievement, attention, and working memory.

Language learning refers to a child’s ability to understand and use language effectively, which is foundational for following instructions, communicating needs, and understanding warnings.

Academic achievement broadly encompasses literacy, numeracy, and reasoning skills that are supported by structured thinking and memory processes. These are useful indicators of general cognitive maturity.

Working memory is the capacity to hold and manipulate information in the mind over short periods. It plays a critical role in problem-solving, following multi-step instructions, and reacting appropriately to unexpected situations—skills that are essential in environments requiring quick thinking and physical coordination, such as on active play devices/areas or rides.

Similarly, Donnelly et al. (2016) found that movement-based learning and activity enhance working memory, attention, and cognitive flexibility, which are core skills for evaluating danger and making safe decisions in dynamic environments.

“Children engaging in regular physical activity show improved executive functions essential for assessing risk and making informed decisions” (Donnelly et al., 2016).

Children between 2 and 7 years (Piaget’s Preoperational Stage) are developing language and imagination but lack logical reasoning and often cannot anticipate risk or understand cause and effect (WebMD Editors, 2021). They tend to engage in egocentric thinking and are heavily influenced by immediate perception rather than logical analysis. As a result, they may be unable to predict the outcome of physical actions or assess hazardous situations. From 7 to 11 years (Concrete Operational Stage), children begin to think logically about concrete situations, understand rules and sequences, and start evaluating cause and effect more effectively, improving their risk perception and response. However, even at this stage, their ability to assess new or complex risks remains limited compared to adults.

Brussoni et al. (2012) emphasize that young children benefit developmentally from risk-based play but must be developmentally ready to engage in such environments independently, or risk exposure to injuries.

Motor Skills and Accident Prevention

Even if children can perceive risk, they must have sufficient motor function to react physically. Nelson and Bingham (2021) observed that many children aged 3–10 exhibited low or average motor skills, limiting their ability to avoid hazards or maintain balance.

“The majority of children aged 3–10 years displayed below-average motor skills, potentially limiting their capacity to avoid or mitigate accidents during active play or rides” (Nelson & Bingham, 2021).

Gross motor skills, such as balance and coordination, are still developing between 3 and 5 years, which makes injury more likely without adequate support or safeguards (Cotten & Clifton, 2019).

The Challenge of Individual Assessment

Evaluating each child’s cognitive and motor readiness for ride eligibility is impractical and would require specialist tools, training, and significant cost. Conducting such assessments at scale is not feasible with current industry resources.

A Practical Alternative: Adjusting Minimum Height Requirements

Height correlates moderately with age. To support accurate and industry-accepted benchmarks, we recommend using the following:

• The World Health Organization (WHO) Child Growth Standards which provide global benchmarks for height-for-age from birth to 19 years.
• The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Growth Charts which include average height-for-age data for U.S. children.
• The Royal College of Paediatrics and Child Health (RCPCH) UK-WHO Growth Charts, which provide UK-specific height-for-age data.

By referencing these established datasets above, the industry can more reliably associate minimum height requirements with developmental readiness.

While raising the minimum height is a practical approach, it must be combined with design considerations to ensure the ride or activity is developmentally appropriate for independent users.

Recommendations for Industry Stakeholders

Manufacturers should consider incorporating assessments of cognitive skills and motor function in their design risk assessments, particularly where devices are intended for use by very young children. Operators should give due consideration to the same factors when carrying out operational risk assessments, ensuring that users are developmentally suited to safely engage with the device/area. Staff training should also incorporate awareness of these developmental considerations to support effective supervision and intervention where required. The industry as a whole should acknowledge and integrate these issues into all stages of equipment design, operation, and oversight.

For Manufacturers:

Design rides/active leisure areas that do not permit adults to ride with their child to be suitable for children who can independently recognise risks and control their movements.

Consider raising minimum height requirements to increase the average user age and developmental readiness.

For Inspectors:

Evaluate devices for suitability of design based on cognitive and motor development, not only on height.

Recommend eligibility thresholds or safety features based on developmental readiness.

For Regulators:

Develop industry-wide guidelines that incorporate developmental appropriateness.

Encourage industry-sponsored research on child development and ride safety.

Stronger Industry Action Required

It is recommended that industry associations and regulatory bodies collaborate to produce clear guidance on developmental readiness for independent participation in children’s activities. This should include:

• Criteria or considerations based on typical cognitive and motor development by age.
• Guidance for manufacturers on incorporating developmental markers into eligibility criteria.
• Sample operational procedures for assessing and responding to mismatches between the design and the likely developmental capability of the user.

Conclusion

Where adult participation is not feasible, children must be independently capable of perceiving and responding to risk. Height and mass alone are not sufficient predictors of readiness. Given the impracticality of individual assessments, the industry should consider raising minimum height requirements and designing devices for developmental suitability.

Manufacturers, inspectors, and regulators must collaborate to ensure children’s rides and activities are developmentally appropriate, enhancing safety for all users.

This article was written by Tony Knutsen, Safety, Compliance & Assurance Lead at LEAPS. If you have any questions, please don’t hesitate to contact him at [email protected]