The reception of computer games by children and the young
The work of art only takes on meaning and becomes interesting
for the person who knows the code by which it is encoded....Those
observers who do not know these codes feel lost, they "drown"
in it; for them it appears to be a chaos of sound and rhythms,
of colours and lines with no rhyme or reason
(Bourdieu, p. 46)
For the uninitiated there can hardly be anything more chaotic
and unmanageable than computer games; the flashing speed of the
pictures crossing the screen alone often excludes the possibility
of grasping the point of it all. The games, which at first glance
look monotonous and seem to live up to all the prejudices about
lack of content and stupidity, are phenomena that can be just
as incomprehensible as abstract paintings and modernist poems
for the unschooled eye and ear. As we know, that sort of phenomenon
very often leads to misunderstandings, and since the first computer
games appeared on the market at the end of the 1970s they have
been represented as dangerous to children and the young. Until
just a few years ago it was common that a strong interest in computers
and computer games was suspected of being a sign of mental deviation,
for example in the form of an exaggerated desire for strictly
structured surroundings (1).
Such a view has become harder to maintain today, when it is no
longer a minority of young people who take an interest in computer
games and similar digital phenomena. They have achieved a central
position in the everyday life of the young in line with a number
of other media. This development has made it an urgent matter
to try to understand the inherent nature of the digital phenomena
instead of trying to explain the mental structure of the players.
This means not least that the computer games must be rescued from
the foregone conclusion that surrounded computers throughout he
1970s and 1980s, when "digital" was synonymous with
cold, rational, mechanical and unimaginative. Unless the majority
of youngsters in the western world have become unimaginative within
a score of years, then something else must be at play in the digital
world than what we can see at first glance. What is it the young
can see in computer games?
To try to answer that it is perhaps better to ask the question
the opposite way. Why is the interest of the young in digital
phenomena immediately seen as something negative by most adults?
Part of the answer can certainly be found in what the American
literary theorist Stanley Fish has called "interpretive
communities", something he has given a central position in
literary research by asserting provocatively that meaning is not
simply embedded in literary works as an essence (2). Art and other
cultural phenomena are not independent of the eye of the beholder.
Fish uses a banal, but illustrative example of the role of the
interpretive process: at the start of one of his classes in literary
analysis, quite by accident, there was a group of words on the
blackboard from a previous history class. The words were above
one another, and without further ado the students accepted them
as a poem and interpreted the words within a framework of understanding
to which they did not really belong. Nevertheless, according to
Fish, they could manage to make an aesthetic interpretation with
some success. Stanley Fish's point with the story is not that
the students lack training, but that training is precisely what
they have. They are part of a special interpretive community
consisting of literary students who know the right literary codes
and can apply them to linguistic phenomena.
With a term taken from Gregory Bateson (3), we can say that the
students in Fish's example "frame" the words on the
blackboard as literature, and that it is this framing that influences
their understanding in a quite crucial way. I believe a similar
situation applies when we try with adult eyes to interpret what
the new digital media mean to the young - as we have seen for
example with one of the latest phenomena of the type, the so-called
"virtual pet" or "electronic pet", an egg-shaped
plastic thing the size of a matchbox furnished with a miniature
grey display and three small buttons - the Tamagotchi. The toy,
which saw the light of day in Japan at the end of 1996 and has
later sold countless millions of copies all over the world, has
been a huge success among the young, and today is so well known
that it hardly needs any introduction. As most people will know,
the electronic "pet" has to fed, cared for, disciplined
and played with if it is to survive and also develop positively
When something is called a virtual or electronic pet, it must
of course arouse surprise and wonder, and the Tamagotchi has stirred
up quite a fuss, at least in the media. This is probably not exactly
something the producers regret, but at the same time it is not
just a PR trick, for the Tamagotchi joins the large number of
digital phenomena that appear to break down the well known boundaries
between the "natural" and the "artificial".
If we take the Tamagotchi literally, it is a sign that something
as genuine, warm and emotionally meaningful as the relationship
between a child and a pet is replaced by an artificial simulation.
That sort of thing must naturally lead to a fear of emotional
damage to the growing generations, and if nothing else, the electronic
"pet" has provided raw material for new lamentations
over the loss of natural childhood and is yet another reason to
criticize today's unfeeling career parents who will no longer
give the children the chance to be together with a real pet. "Give
the children a dog", we hear from indignant, well-meaning
grown-ups, who feel called to protect children and childhood and
who uncritically perceive the children's interest in the Tamagotchi
as a symptom of emotional impoverishment and a cry for help (5).
If you have had an electronic pet in your hands, you have to
wonder how anyone could confuse it with a flesh-and-blood pet.
The Tamagotchi has only a few formal features in common with a
real pet, for example the fact that it has to be fed and disciplined,
but it completely lacks the aspects that are important to children
in their relationships with pets. Claiming that youngsters might
confuse one with the other really says very little about children
and Tamagotchis, and so much more about adults' ideas of children
and childhood. These ideas are interesting enough, but have a
limited truth value when it comes to the meaning of the new media
in the lives of the young. The new electronic media always seem
to fit rather too neatly and completely into a community of interpretation
where modern childhood represents a loss and a decline compared
with the childhood of earlier times. "Electronic pets"
or even worse, "digital pets", are eminently suitable
as a new argument for such a view, for such designations must
almost be called self-contradictory.
Any owner of a Tamagotchi would probably agree, which does not
however mean that the owner cannot forge emotional ties with the
thing, just as one can with dolls, books, cars, paintings or other
material things with a sentimental value, and you can even cry
over a "dead" Tamagotchi, as over other things you lose
(7). Undoubtedly you can go too far in your emotional attachment
to things, but that is not only true of digital products, and
it does not make an electronic toy into a pet.
The Tamagotchi can hardly be seriously considered as a replacement
for something else, something better, as implied by the criticism
of it, and by the general tendency to view the new digital media
for the young in this light. The electronic "pets" are
just one of many examples of new media types that are immediately
met with surprise and concern, because we too quickly take the
"content" at its face value. It is an indication of
naive interpretation when we equate what the digital phenomena
simulate with what they actually are and mean to the media users
in the specific situations in which they are used. Thus we confuse
what the Tamagotchi imitates with what it is, and it is placed
in a context of understanding which is quite different from the
context in which the young place it and use it.
The reaction to and the interpretation of the electronic "pets"
does not differ much from the reaction to the first types of popular
digital media. When the first home computer began to appear around
1980, they give rise to a widespread fear that youngsters would
be "seduced" by the new interactive medium and see the
computer as a partner that could simulate and replace social interaction
with others. A prominent example of this fear was the American
sociologist Sherry Turkle, who described in a successful book
about computer culture in 1984 how adolescent boys could become
very preoccupied - almost obsessed - with computer games and could
end up preferring the well-ordered, rule-bound, controllable universes
of the games to relations with others in a more chaotic reality
(8). With the greatest of ease she linked this preoccupation with
the mental and sexual development in puberty of the boys who were
interested in computers, and got the digital, rule-based character
of the computer games to fit beautifully with deviant mental development
and narcissism among the young, so that her interpretation of
the interest in computers could easily be dovetailed into an interpretive
community which in the mid-eighties included many teachers and
carers in the child and youth areas.
In theory - or perhaps in the light of certain particular theories
- such an interpretation may look credible. It may seem a plausible
explanation of why boys can be so fascinated by computers and
computer games, but this reading of the role of computer games
rarely stands up to an encounter with reality. Turkle bases her
theory for example on a basic assumption that the use of the computer
is an individual affair, which agrees with the general view. Playing
computer games has generally been regarded as an individual, more
or less asocial activity, but we need not go further than the
nearest youth recreation centre, youth club or computer caf? to
discover that this is far from the case. On the contrary there
is a wealth of social activity around the games, which are closely
integrated in the social relations and cultural networks of the
The point of Pac-Man
Neither the traditional computer games nor more recent types like
the Tamagotchi really make sense until they are placed in the
right context of understanding. An even more illustrative example
of this is the computer game Pac-Man, one of the most popular,
best known games from the early years of the computer games, at
the end of the 1970s. Like many other games from that period it
is so simple that it seems incomprehensible that the young spent
much time on it; but Pac-Man is a genuine classic which many young
people will also know today. Viewed with today's eyes the game
is very primitive, with crude graphics rather like the Tamagotchi.
Pac-Man consists of one fixed display with a few small square
dots distributed among horizontal and vertical lines, arranged
in a pattern which with some good will can be seen as a simple
The object of the game is to get a round figure, Pac-Man, to
"eat" his way through the dots in the labyrinth. When
this has been done, the player gets a similar, but slightly more
complex maze on the screen and can start over again. Some excitement
and dynamics are added to the game by four triangular figures
(often called "the ghosts"), who move around the labyrinth
in an apparently random pattern. If one of the figures touches
Pac-Man, he "dies", and the game is over, with the usual
message "Game Over. Do you want to play again?".
If you take Pac-Man at face value, then there is not even, as
with the Tamagotchi, a story to get hold of, and it can be hard
to see any other point to the game than training the player's
skills in moving around in labyrinths as fast as possible (11).
It is hard to find leverage for an analysis and to decipher any
meaning in it at all. Unlike other cultural phenomena, there is
no help to be found in a universal cultural background (12), and
Pac-Man clearly demonstrates the importance of "interpretive
communities". You have to play the game before it will reveal
its nature, and this is something that far from happens to everyone.
Some fall for it, others find it monotonous, boring and pointless,
but whatever attitude one has to the game, the interest rarely
lasts very long. If one plays it individually, Pac-Man may be
exciting at first, but rather boring in the long run. The game
only takes on a content in a social context.
Cultural and social utility value
Many attempts to explain the meaning and influence of computer
games have, perhaps for want of a better approach, taken their
point of departure in computer technology and have tried to deduce
the meaning of the game from this. To date this has not led to
any convincing explanatory model - for good reasons, I believe.
This is really like starting with the physical properties of a
ball when you want to understand football as a cultural phenomenon.
In the physical sense a ball can in principle bounce, roll or
fly, but that tells us nothing about football; and from the physical
properties it is at any rate not easy to guess how the ball is
the basis for many hours of play for children and adults and for
a huge entertainment industry. To add a description of a football
pitch and the rules of the game does not help much either. The
ball cannot be understood meaningfully outside the situation,
the social and cultural practice, in which it is used. The difference
between the physical ball and football is purely and simply a
shared culture, an interpretive community which forms the setting
for the game of football, and which of course consists of much
more than the ball, the pitch and the official rules. In that
sense cultural phenomena are quite dependent on living cultural,
interpretive communities, and even if there are many differences
between football and computer games, both are functions of social
and cultural communities (13).
Above, I quoted a statement by Bourdieu that works of art only
become interesting when one can decode them. However, this is
only one side of the matter. Just as important is the fact that
the decoding of a work is not simply the same as the experience
if it. Knowledge of the codes is rather just a necessary condition
(14). Even if one has learned the codes, this does not necessarily
mean that one can (or wishes to) do something with the works.
Often one "can't use them", a problem that any teacher
with art and culture on the agenda knows from pupils and students.
One can possibly learn to find a use for the art, but decoding
and understanding are hardly enough in themselves.
It is worth asking whether works of art and the phenomena of
popular culture actually differ in principle in this respect.
A poem or a sculpture does not reveal itself to us without some
prior knowledge in the observer, but computer games and music
videos, for example, do not immediately reveal themselves immediately
to the outsider either. Not that I would claim that values and
qualities in a modernist poem and in a game like Pac-Man are one
and the same thing. On the contrary they are precisely very different
and incomparable entities, each belonging in its own register,
something of which we are perhaps not sufficiently aware. It is
a prominent problem for example in teaching that the grown-ups
of today not only lack familiarity with the codes; they also rarely
have "a use for" computer games, Tamagotchis and music
videos. At the same time very few adults have personal experiences
to draw on that can correct misinterpretations of the phenomena.
In the educational system, this is further reinforced by that
fact that one first and foremost has to deal with culturally formative
work and thus with a particular kind of cultural quality, while
the young freely use popular culture phenomena whose aim is not
formative - at least not in the sense in which the educational
system understands it.
When it comes to understanding phenomena like computer games,
it is first and foremost a matter of looking through and beyond
the filter constituted by formative culture, and of seeing what
the young in fact do with the media. Some of the exercise consists
of trying to stop focusing on the content of the media, as it
appears immediately to our "adult" eyes, and looking
instead at how they are used; that is, trying to see how the young
interpret the media in practice (15).
In one framework of interpretation the Tamagotchi appears to be
a simulation, to be "artificial life", and thus a simplistic
mechanical substitute for the so-called genuine. But Tamagotchis
are only in theory of interest as examples of "artificial
life". They have not achieved their popularity because they
imitate real pets more or better than other phenomena, but because
they function and work in the social interaction among the young.
Similarly, games like Pac-Man or more contemporary action games
like "Doom" and "Quake" can in one framework
of understanding undoubtedly be interpreted as simplistic and
extremely monotonous, so one has to wonder why some people can
play them again and again - and this wondering can easily lead
on the question of what it is in the games that creates the "dependence"
that seems to affect at least certain young people (16).
The simplicity and repetitiveness of the action games is however
an important reason for their popularity. In the context in which
the games are used, for example in video arcades and amusement
halls, the reason for the success is relatively easy to see, for
the games work fine as a basis for the social interaction. They
fit perfectly into the boys' play culture (17), where the competition
to be "good" and preferably the best is an important
pivot of their relations. The games are easy to learn, so you
can quickly become part of the group, while it can take long practice
to become good. In the competitive nature of these social relations
we also have an important part of the explanation of the girls'
lack of interest in the common computer games. As a rule the games
fit well into the boys' play culture, but less so into the girls'
social relations (18).
The more complex types of games, for example the so-called platform
games consisting of a number of "levels" (19), which
were mainly produced in the eighties for the popular Amiga computers
and today especially for the Nintendo, Sega, and Sony Playstation,
work in the same way as the action games, but they go far beyond
the arcades and the direct comparison of how many points you have
won. Here you can compete over which level you have reached. Since
you only get through the levels by solving a number of problems,
finding secret doors and the like, the games provide ample opportunity
to discuss approaches and to exchange tips and tricks.
In other words, the games have both play value and a kind of
exchange value, and the latter is an important part of what could
be called the computer culture of the young, which from the outset
has also included other types of games than the fast action games,
for example the so-called adventure games, where the games are
a kind of voyage of exploration into the adventure universe of
the game. One of the first in this genre with very simple, primitive
graphics, was "Castle", which is almost as old as Pac-Man,
and for that reason makes the principles clearer. More recent
games of the same type have the same structure and the same type
of plot, but also have exuberant graphics and pictures which tend
to divert the attention of the player. Connoisseurs of the genre
can appreciate whether the graphics are impressive, but they do
not confuse this with the game itself, and it is an important
point that the old games were played with the same enthusiasm
in their day as the more recent flashy types of today. In other
words, it is hardly the appearance of the game that is crucial
to its popularity.
"Castle" is not about being fast, but about finding
your way around a castle of three storeys, each with twelve rooms.
On the screen the rooms appear as from above with quite primitive
patterns for walls, markings of doors and stairs, a few items
of furniture and enemies, which may for example take the form
of a minimalistic rhomboid or triangle. The players have to fight
various kinds of enemies, find secret doors and routes, so in
the end they can escape from the castle. The labyrinth is not
manageable at first glance, for you only see one room of the castle
at a time, and it is not possible to get an overview map. So it
can be hard to keep track of the 36 rooms spread over three storeys.
A few years ago I observed a crowd of children who played Castle
over an extended period, both at home and in their club. They
solved the problem by making an overview - by mapping the castle
room by room, storey by storey. This alone took a long (and pleasurable)
time, but in itself it was not enough to get through the game.
The boys often came to a halt, for example, when they could not
find a secret door or how to get past a vampire. In this case
the social network helped with ideas (20), and for a period the
exchange of tips and tricks was a central element of the social
relations in the group of boys mentioned. A good tip was of great
value, and was not simply passed on; it was often held back as
a secret until the right moment.
So computer culture comprises much more than the actual activity
in front of the screen. The games for example provide raw material
for exchanges that bear up the social network. Moreover, this
need not be limited to games; it may concern the computer itself.
For some adults, children and teenagers technology can be good
material for conversations and discussions of bits and bytes,
Megahertzes and RAM, matters about which the uninitiated of course
understand very little. As conversational material, as a basis
for the exchange of tips and tricks and for social relations,
computer technology has played a central role since the first
home computers appeared around 1980, and the great "computer
interest" of the young, which as we have seen is often regarded
with concern, has in most cases perhaps not to any great extent
been about interest in the technology. Viewed in this light, interest
in computers and interest in computer games are two sides of the
same social coin.
Computer culture - interpretive communities
Computer games are today sophisticated, and above all they have
far better graphics. It is no longer squares and lines you find
on the screen, but three-dimensional figures with natural movements
and so-called artificial life, and the images of the computer
games are more and more like those we see on TV and in films.
The games are far richer in their pictorial expression and they
are more complex than Pac-Man and Castle. This development could
easily make one regard Pac-Man and Castle as the first primitive
attempts to create a new medium, and as a thing of the past. This
is not least tempting when the new games provide far more opportunities
to go to work on content analyses of the games as texts. Here
we have stories, characters and images for which we have traditions
and tools for characterization, analysis and interpretation.
With the above I have tried to argue that with this type of analysis,
we place the games in the wrong framework of interpretation, because
computer games primarily acquire their meaning and content through
their concrete use in concrete situations. In this sense they
are more a kind of tool for social relations than a means of communicating
the messages one normally looks for in the media. This should
not be seen as a claim that there is no content in computer games,
or that this does not matter; it should be taken as an indication
that we cannot interpret a content outside the concrete practice
which also provides the framework of understanding. For example,
something that might on the face of it look extremely violent
on the screen may in practice have quite a different function.
The players might for example blast one another and everything
else in a violent game like "Doom II", while at the
same time enjoying extremely peaceful, playful relations, as is
in fact usually the case in war games (21).
This is not to say that the content of computer games is of no
importance. But the question of what the "content",
the "message" and the "meaning" actually are
should be answered within the relevant framework of interpretation.
The computer games exist in and are dependent on a context which
is at once a concrete social community and an interpretive community.
In this sense one could speak of a "computer culture"
or a "computer games culture" which is an integral part
of the everyday life of the young - a more central part, of course,
for some than for others. This computer culture neither arises
from the computer games nor from thin air. It builds on young
people's play culture, which shapes the use of the games (22).
The function of the computer games as a basis for and tools for
social relations does not differ in principle from the role that
TV and video can have, for example for a group of boys who watch
violent action films together, for a group of kindergarten children
who play "Turtles", or for a family that uses TV as
a setting for being together on a Friday evening (23). In this
context, quiz shows for example have some important qualities
and can do something quite different from the so-called quality
programmes, which are a hopeless flop on a Friday evening in the
bosom of the family. This type of TV should, like computer games
and other phenomena of popular culture, be evaluated on their
own terms, as good or bad tools, not as true or false messages.
Carsten Jessen, February 1998
1.E.g. in Turkle 1984. The assumption was still central to research
projects at the beginning of this decade, e.g. in Provenzo 1990,
Nissen 1993 and Leu 1993, while it is however increasingly being
rejected as a relevant explanatory model.
2. Fish 1980.
3. Bateson 1972
4. For a more detailed description of the Tamagotchi and similar
pets, see Eisenmenger 1998. The Tamagotchi has been joined by
a new type, the "DigiMonster", where you have to train
your own little monster to battle with other DigiMonsters. The
battles are fought automatically when you link up the DigiMonsters.
5. Fyns Stiftstidende, 08.02.98
6. I.e. in fact the aspects that adults are often responsible
for in connection with the care of pets. Attempts have also been
made to sell the Tamagotchi as a kind of educational toy that
teaches children to care.
7. Children's attachment to Tamagotchis however as a rule has
nothing like the same emotional nature as their attachment to
dolls, teddy bears or pets.
8. Turkle's views are still important and very influential, and
in her latest book from 1996 she repeats a similar argument about
digital phenomena as a substitute for social relations in connection
with the Internet.
9. For further clarification of the social side of the computer
games, see Jessen 1990, 1993, 1995, 1997.
10. The illustration shows the simplest version of Pac-Man. The
game also exists with other figures, but the principle is the
same, and the simple version is no less fun to play than the others.
11. Studies have in fact shown that taxi drivers and pilots are
best at playing this kind of game, since unlike the rest of us
they are used to judging the relative speeds of objects (i.e.
specifically the "ghosts"). Greenfield 1984.
12. Many attempts have been made to analyse Pac-Man, for example
by Bent Fausing fifteen years ago (Fausing 1984). His article,
not least because of the interval in time, is a clear example
of how a framework of understanding can shape an interpretation.
13. See note 9.
14. Which is in fact Bourdieu's point.
15. Cf. the way the anthropologist Clifford Geertz (1973) analyses
culture, and so-called media ethnography (see for example Drotner
16. As for example in a media debate on computer games and ludomania
in the spring of 1997.
17. By play culture I mean here young people's own culture and
cultural networks, which consist of both expressive forms such
as games and forms of social interaction, as well as much more,
which provide the setting for an important part of their lives
with one another. It is not usual to regard the social interactions
of youths as play culture, but it seems fruitful to me. For a
thorough introduction to the concept, see Mouritsen 1996.
18. See Jessen 1995a and 1997a.
19. Readers with no knowledge of the genre can imagine the levels
as something like the "cartoon films" you can make with
a shoe box with holes and long strips of paper. The levels take
the form of long "strips" of landscape on the screen
and along the way the player has to solve problems and fight enemies.
20. Such networks around computers and games today consist almost
solely of children and older boys, but when the computer games
were a brand new phenomenon, they included children, youths and
adults. 21. See Faurholt & Jessen: "Doom II i Havnbjerg",
1996, and for war games Mouritsen 1996.
22. See Jessen 1995a and Faurholt & Jessen 1997.
23. The role of the action films as tools is something I read
out of Arendt Rasmussen 1995, while the example of the TV quiz
in families with children was taken from my colleague, the research
fellow Jesper Olesen.
Arendt Rasmussen, Tove (1995): Actionfilm og drengekultur. Aalborg:
Institut for Kommunikation, Aalborg University.
Bateson, Gregory (1972): "A Theory of Play and Fantasy",
in Steps to an Ecology of Mind. New York.
Bourdieu, Pierre (1995): Distinksjonen. En sociologisk kritikk
av d?mmekraften. Oslo, Pax.
Drotner, Kirsten (1993): "Medieetnografiske problemstillinger
- en oversigt". Mediekultur no. 21.
Eisenmenger, Ricard (1998): My little Cyberpet. London: Prentice
Faurholt, Lis & Jessen, Carsten (1997): "DOOM II i Havnbjerg.
Computerspil, legekultur og uformelle kompetencer". Tidsskrift
for Boerne- og Ungdomskultur no. 38/39
Fausing, Bent (1984): "Fascination - saet verden ikke mere
er til" in Holst, Nina et al. (eds.) (1984): N.I.T. - problem
og l?sning. En opslagsbog om Ny Informations Teknologi. Copenhagen:
Christian Ejlers' Forlag
Fish, Stanley (1980): "Is There a Text in This Class?",
in Is There a Text in This Class? The Authority of interpretive
Communities. Cambridge, Ma.: Harvard Univ. Press.
Geertz, Clifford (1973): The Interpretation of Cultures. N.Y.
Greenfield, Patricia (1984): Mind and Media: The effects of television,
Video games and Computers. Cambridge Ma.: Harvard University Press.
Jessen, Carsten (1990): "Boerns kultur i en computerverden"
(2nd ed.) in Jens F. Jensen (ed.): Computerkultur - computermedier
- computersemiotik. Nordisk Sommeruniversitets Skriftserie 32
Jessen, Carsten (1991): "Boern bruger TV". Unge Paedagoger
Jessen, Carsten (1993): "Boern, mediekompetencer og nye udtryksformer".
BARN 5/ Tidsskrift for B?rne- og Ungdomskultur 28
Jessen, Carsten (1995a): "Computeren i boernehaven".
Tidsskrift for B?rne- og Ungdomskultur no. 35
Jessen, Carsten (1995b): "Boerns computerkultur". Dansk
P?dagogisk Tidsskrift no. 2
Jessen, Carsten (1997): "Girls, Boys and Computers in the
Kindergarten" in Henning Bentzen (ed.): Forum on Children's
Culture. Danmarks Laererhoejskole 1997.
Jessen, Carsten (1997): Boerns computerkultur. Artikler om computeren
i b?rns legekultur. Center for Kulturstudier, Odense University
(a collection of the above-mentioned articles)
Kaarsted, Thomas: "Saa koeb dem dog en hund!". Fyns
Leu, Hans Rudolf (1993): Wie Kinder mit Computern umgehen. Studie
zur Entzauberung einer neuen Technologie in der Familie. Munich:
DJI Verlang Deutsches Jugendinstitut.
Mouritsen, Flemming (1996): Legekultur. Essays om boernekultur,
leg og fortaelling. Odense: Odense Universitetsforlag.
Nissen, J?rgen (1993): Pojkarna vid datorn. Unge entusiaster i
datateknikkens vaarld. Stockholm/Stehag: Symposium Graduale.
Provenzo, Eugene (1990) Video Kids. Harvard University Press.
Turkle, Sherry (1987): Dit andet jeg. Computeren og den menneskelige
tanke. Copenhagen: Teknisk Forlag. (Eng. 1984).
Associate professor, Ph.d.
The Danish University of Education
Department of Educational Anthropology
Tlf: 3969 6633
Fax: 3969 0081