So I was planning on writing this one at some point and bringing together points from my article about violence in games and military indoctrination . So when Polygon’s lead editor Ben Kuchera decided to release this article I decided it was time to move this one up the queue of articles I’ve been planning.

Let me first preface this by saying I am no expert on some of the concepts I’m going to be bringing up. I’m going to do what very few people in other science fields will do and attempt to talk psychology. My limited experience of psychology is a book, two flatmates at university and a basic overview of educational and developmental psychology during teacher training. As such much of this work may have been expanded upon or be void however I’m working with what is meant to be the building blocks of educational theory in the form of Piaget’s educational theories.

In-case you need it here’s a quick run down of Piaget’s educational theories state that there are 4 stages development.



These are less important, the more important part is about Schema.

Sensorimotor during which we learn about the world primarily through out sense this lasts approximately through ages 0-2 years and consists of touching and chewing things to learn about them. This is why babies do dumb things like stick fingers in plug sockets or try to touch fire. They’re trying to learn. During Sensorimotor children develop Object permanence which in simple terms is the understanding that things exist and happen outside of their sensory perception. Or in easier terms if you place a toy under a blanked the child will know the toy is under the blanked and hasn’t disappeared and playing peek a bo no longer has such an impact as the child now knows you’re no longer vanishing into thin air.

Next between the ages of 2 and 7 is the pre-operational stage where children begin create mental representations of events and objects. This is when much of playing pretend comes in. Be it sword fighting, amry men, playing doctor, playing shop etc etc. At this stage however children’s world view is still very egocentric (they have trouble seeing anyone else’s point of view) e.g. I like the Tweenies so everyone else likes it too. Also during this stage Animism is displayed where they’ll attribute human feelings and intentions to inanimate objects such as Teddy Bears.During this stage children also begin to ask a lot of question to acquire knowledge.



Next between the ages of 7 and 11 is pre-operational stage. This is when logic and reasoning first develops with the start of logic and abstract thinking. The best test to show this development is posing the question “If A is greater than B and B is greater than C is A greater than C ?” At this stage children begin to: recognise their thoughts are different to the thoughts of others; be able to classify objects on more parameters beyond their colour and shape (e.g. Number of objects, the weight or mass of the object etc)); think logically about events; become more proficient at mathematical problems such as addition and subtraction. It’s also during this stage Children learn about being able to manipulate or change objects such as a deflated ball still being that ball.

The last stage in development is the formal operational which lasts roughly from the age 11 and can go till 15 -20 years old. This is when skills in prediction, creative thinking and systematic approaches to problems develop it’s during this time abstract ideas and concepts can be introduced to children more as they begin to develop the ability to think in the abstract. It’s also during this stage children are able to analyse their own thought processes and try to analyse other peoples.

This is probably very simplified and not representative of all development that occurs as I’m sure we’re all fairly different people to when we were 18 and I don’t simply mean drinking far more.



The final bit you need to know about Piaget’s theories is the idea of schema. Essentially mental grouping rules which are used and applied while thinking and develop throughout the developmental stages becoming more complex and sophisticated sets of rules. When a Schema (set of mentally constructed rules) are challenged and seen not to be correct then they adapt and if required create a new schema. This sounds very complicated (to me at least) but the simple way to explain it in an easily understandable way is if you’ve ever seen a kid in town pointing at a man and going “Dadda” only for the mother to go “No that’s not Dadda”. This is a apparently a very common occurrence in children and this is due to the development of schema and the complexity of those schema. A child doesn’t think that every man is their Dad but in reality that’s what you call people with said attributes. Children can’t tell the difference hugely between nuisances so if their dad has a beard every bearded man to them should be called Dad. Now children grow out of this fairly quick because their parents correct them by telling them no that’s not Daddy and in time their Schema assimilates new information as is able to recognise that the features of being male and having a beard alone doesn’t make them Dad.

So why the hell did I have to give you that short (and trust me this is the short version) run down of Piaget’s theories and how is any of that relevant or important well.

On to the article



The core concept of the claims is that people could unintentionally internalise harmful messages and ideas from the media they consume. In the most technical sense this is absolutely TRUE. Well it oddly it has absolutely everything to do with the issues at hand and oddly even relates to things Jack Thompson has recently said in an interview The core concept of the claims is that people could unintentionally internalise harmful messages and ideas from the media they consume. In the most technical sense this is absolutely TRUE.

Ok put down the flaming torches I said in the most technical sense it’s true, In theory. In Theory plenty of things are true. Now where this idea comes from is the concept that people won’t have a pre-existing schema and as such will use what’s being told to them in games as the basis for creating a schema, initially placing misconceptions a problems in. Now misconceptions often require challenging otherwise they will continue and it can often require slightly more work to challenge a misconception than to initially create one and allow said misconception to become part of a person’s though processes (Schema). To give you a very easy example I know of that is a huge misconception often taught in science in early years let me put a question to you. Answer in the comments if you want but I want you to do this without using google if you answer in the comments.

What causes the seasons to occur ?

I’ll put the actual answer in my next blog as an end piece but for those of you who have googled it I wonder how many of you might have had your ideas challenged. I know this misconception because it’s one I had going into highschool and it’s one of the most poorly taught things in science in early years.

The idea of the ESRB has two functions, the first is to inform and protect consumers by preventing people getting hold of games before they have developed enough to be able to complexly analyse them and they will have already created schema for the situations and events shown. The second and more important function is to protect the industry itself from claims of trying to corrupt people and harmful messages. Yes you know that age rating ? It means something. Now the reason for the ratings is at each level it’s suggested children will have schema’s already and be able to handle the content, the rating is often closer to the top end of the developmental stages rather than the lower end. Hence an M is 17+ or 18 in the PEGI system near the top end of psychological development .

So could someone internalise the idea of violence being seen as acceptable ? Well only if they were introduced to these ideas early in development probably in the concrete operational stage AND at the same time these ideas weren’t challenged by parents or society and or were reinforced by society or parents for a long time. This idea forms the basis of the concept of the cycle of abuse, where an abused child goes on to become a parent who abuses if they do not get help to come to terms with the violent acts done to them. The key part is challenging the ideas and causing a person’s schema to have to adapt to new information.

It is entirely possible to introduce children to media beyond their level and there will be no effect because parent’s and society challenge the beliefs (schema) if they do form and cause them to adapt. What the ESRB ratings do is prevent children being exposed to ideas that could be seen as positive due to the use of skinner box style reward techniques which could give the wrong idea. The ESRB is making sure children don’t get exposed to the ideas in adult entertainment as the first exposure to said ideas. It’s why for example I was praised for teaching a group of 13-14 year olds at one point about chlorine gas being used in World War I and why it was harmful (don’t worry there was a greater context to this involving teaching about group 7 elements and their uses and it as culturally relevant). It sounds very bizarre but me teaching them about a small part of the horrors of war, combined with the media talking about it, their History teachers telling them about the events and of course English teachers studying the war poems with them. All this helps create the schema that real war is hell and a terrible thing. Jonathan Holmes himself wrote about the ESRB previously and his article it contains a brilliant example of a schema being challenged and then adapted, in the form of him pulling a chair out from under someone and seeing a result different to the expected one. This show just how easy a misconception can be corrected and this happens all the time chances are you barely notice it most of the time.

Kids shows and teaching of kids is designed to create positive / societal beneficial schema be it from the messages in kids show to the more blatant GI Joe PSAs or be it many books aimed at children.

The bizarre issues that seems to be brought up as the reason for changing games etc is the idea of people not being able to tell between fantasy and reality.



Get the latest Flash Player

Learn more about upgrading to an HTML5 browser Adobe Flash Player or an HTML5 supported browser is required for video playback. There’s actually a psychological principal called Illusory superiority where people tend to over-estimate their own abilities and understanding or under-estimate everyone else’s. The idea that they alone can see and are shining a light on the truth to protect you from some great evil. That they alone are able to do this and see the truth. The idea that they must do something to protect people and society as a whole from harm.

Now you might think that the above quote is pretty accurate and I’d have to say to an extent it can be. However another psychologist called Vygotsky proposed the theory of the zone of proximal development. this is based on Socrates demonstrating that with guidance an uneducated slave was capable of learning and working on a complicated geometry puzzle and taught said slave the concept of area changing depending on the size of a shape. People aren’t dumb they just need people to help them understand and to get them initially to stop and listen before they do something dumb. Also before anyone makes an assumption here I’m “dumb” as hell and I’ll admit it jsut to be clear. People as a collective don’t need protecting they need teaching and to be allowed to develop understandings with assistance themselves. It’s part of the reason why modern teaching is steering away from lecture / teacher led activities and more towards self directed learning for the children and peer based learning where pupils learn from one another. If one person doesn’t get an idea but their friend does then allowing the friend to explain the idea can allow a different approach to be tried and an explanation by someone with a greater understanding of the other persons thought process. As much as teachers might try to understand others they are no longer children / teenagers and while most can remember back, things do change and as such their teenage friend might well be able to explain a concept they understand to a friend in a better easier way than a the teacher trying to think of new ways to explain it.

The idea that video games can implant harmful idea is a misconception at least when discussing adult humans as most of us already have a Schema developed and no matter how realistic can tell the difference between fantasy and reality. It’s LARPing events don’t turn into huge bloodbaths and most injuries probably occur by accident rather than intentionally inflicted.



Get the latest Flash Player

Learn more about upgrading to an HTML5 browser Adobe Flash Player or an HTML5 supported browser is required for video playback.

So how does any of this relate to Ben Kuchera ballsack ? Well it’s pretty evident in his more recent piece than he’s talking bollocks or more correctly leaving bollcoks out there for all to see. Hence this article. The comparison made in the title to They Live doesn’t relate to entertainment media so much as it does to adverts. While in-adverted use of Skinner box techniques might influence thinking over time they’re by no means effective when compared to advertising techniques which rely on the creation of a new schema. In many cases using primarily fear in some form to cloud logical judgement and thinking and implanting suggestions and ideas using human survival instincts, be it as an individual or as a species to allow the idea in as such. While it’s good to examine the underlying ideas and themes in a piece of media it’s a misconception to feel the need to do it for fear for the public or society or dare I say

because someone already is and it’s called the ESRB. I’ll go more into advertising theory another day I hope you don’t mind as this article is getting long.

I may not think the ESRB is perfect and I do think it is still a little over protective compared to other ratings boards but I can understand what it’s function is. As without it the alternative would be going the route of the Hays code or the Comics Code Authority. As public perception of games evolves and people start to question if adults really can’t tell fantasy from reality (note most sane people can do this even with films with real life actors) then chances are the restrictions will ease up to be more in line with other industries.

I think the best way I can end this is by saying this. Debate and exposure to differing ideas is important and if you try to deny them a place they can and will find alternative platforms. Remember that in future Ben Kuchera.

Supporting the ESRB doing their job is why I’m adding in this final part to congratulate a few companies for their actions at Gadget show live 2014 and 2013. You see it’s a public technology show and on multiple stands as you’d expect were games aimed at older audiences. At almost all the stands I went to, and booths I went to, with an adult game on show they asked to see ID before I was allowed inside to play the game. So well done EA, 2K interactive, Trion Worlds and Nintendo you guys were actually doing something good and what should be done. Shame you didn’t manage that Capcom as I played Dragon age unchallenged as did the 8 year old who went to play it after me.