But then just because it's researched doesn't mean it's good. Why do girls now prefer the narrative form of a previously creative toy? Why do lego blocks need a back story? Is that something that girls have always wanted; is it something that's created by changes in society; is it beneficial to girls? Is it possible harmful to boys to not have the narrative toys? (Although, with all the ROBOT BATTLE IN SPACE stuff hat lego has done for years I suppose they're just re-balancing an existing skew).
There's a lot of research about the "princess phase" which is why most toys for girls are boxed in that disgusting pink - purple combination.
This book is quite good. The biases are clear.
(http://www.amazon.co.uk/The-Real-Toy-Story-Consumers/dp/0552...)
Why is everything aimed at girls the same kind of hideous pink? Because they've tested it, and pink works.
Here's a reasonable (the biases are clear) book explaining some of the stuff that toy manufacturers do.
(http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Toy-Story-Ruthless-Consumers/dp...)
Unfortunately, toy making and designing is a vicious ultra-competitive business, dominated by a few huge companies.
The book "The Real Toy Story: Inside the Ruthless Battle for Britain's Youngest Consumers" is interesting. And the biases (as you can tell from the title) are pretty clear.
(http://www.amazon.co.uk/Real-Toy-Story-Ruthless-Consumers/dp...)