As a handful of SG faithful may know, I’m an avid reader of UK newspaper The Times (famed for writing about our Microsoft Surface parody…and not crediting us by name). It’s probably the reason for my writing being so immensely BORING.
Anyway, way back in March last year they wrote an article about UK child psychologist – don’t you hate adults that pretend to know more about kids than they actually do? – Dr Tanya Byron, who made a bunch of recommendations about what to do about violent games, yadda yadda; so far, so Daily Mail.
Thing is, I wrote a letter to the newspaper (which was published, fancy that) and made a bunch of nice points. And now it appears some researchers in Holland totally agree with me! See what I mean over the jump…
I can’t be bothered reprinting the letter in full, since it was kinda long and has long vanished from the Times‘ website, but the way I ended it was what caught my eye lately, when I read up on something over at GamePolitics.
The nanny state that Britain has become [I was more in touch with my inner liberal at this time] has meant that more of life’s simple pleasures are becoming taboo. Children will only become more interested in the “forbidden fruit” that video games will become.
There was a bunch of stuff about GTA IV being self-aware of it’s own anti-Establishment attitude and all of that, but it’s not hugely relevant here. What is relevant is that a study conducted by two universities – one in Michigan, and one in Amsterdam in Holland – is pretty much agreeing with what my letter said, even down to calling it ‘forbidden fruit’. And I’ve got a serious weakness for tooting my own horn when I’m right about things.
Researchers at the VU University Amsterdam yesterday published the results of their study titled “Age and Violent-Content Labels Make Video Games Forbidden Fruits for Youth” (you’re welcome, researchers). They found that, for every single age group and gender group – from 12 year old girls to 8 year old boys – interest in games peaked when the game that was described to them was violent or contained mature content.
Obviously, this sort of news utterly counters everything that age ratings strive to achieve. Age ratings are supposed to inform parents of things their kids aren’t supposed to have. How exactly can we say these ratings are succeeding if there’s research – and, ahem, accurate letters to newspapers – proving that they just make kids want the games more?
I totally know what’s to blame though: absolutely frickin’ massive ratings on the front of game boxes. You know the ones I’m talking about! I bet if we took those away and gave games no visible ratings at all kids wouldn’t want to play them anymore; it’s obviously the great big ‘18′ labels and massive ‘M for Mature’ stickers that are making these games all the more desirable.
If you don’t believe me and my writing skillz, believe the boffins. What’s the point in rating systems if they produce an opposite effect to the one they’re striving for in the first place?
Forbidden Fruit Theory 101 – GamePolitics
Popularity: 1% [?]
2 comments:
1-The Forbidden Fruit Theory and its relation with video games dose not need a study or research to prove, not even with movies, clothes, hang outs, and and and.
its the human nature to seek/want the forbidden.
they came up with “Reverse Psychology” for a reason, right?
2- removing any indicator of age and rate from the pack of the game is exactly what reverse psychology is,
but than again, you are not solving the problem here, this is just a way to make the problem (youth buying games that is not appropriate for their age) a little bit harder.
they still can find out that a game is labeled (+18) and (M for Mature) on the internet in less than a minute.
again, well thought, well written, well done.
I totaly agree. Most of these kids go to school and brag about how they have GTA IV making other kids want it more. That is the nature of these kids to brag about having something that most of the time they shouldn’t. Removing the label won’t afect that.
I know this to be true, having seen a kid I was friends with when I was twelve thinking a game I had was cool because it was rated M, and his mom wouldn’t let him have those games. If they took the ratings off the boxes, I bet kids wouldn’t want those kind of games quite so much simply because they weren’t “forbidden” anymore.
Exactly. Human nature, not even just child psychology. The more someone can’t have something, or is told he can’t/shouldn’t have something,the more he wants it. Even if he doesn’t want it.