Curiouser, Curiouser

“Curiouser and curiouser," surprised Alice when she saw her body began to grow big, larger enough that even her head hit the roof. words which perfectly fits with the story of Alice in Wonderland, a story full of strange yet interesting situation that intrigue more and more our curiosity. And yes, without the feeling of curiosity, Alice would never eat the troubling cake, and so do we, as readers, won’t continue turn the next pages. Curiosity itself is strange. It could drive us to do a certain activity without the concern of the external value, something that we, as a proud rational being should never think of. However, we always experienced it. When we curious about something, what we really care about is the thing itself, which we want to know more about it. Curiosity actually quite similar with the reason why we play. When we play, we only did it because we found that the play is fun, and it is worth to do, even though we already know it will only waste our time (I believe there are a lot of people object what I have just said, but let’s just accept it, whatever the benefit the play gives to you, it actually less than the other more important activities would give).  Without the feeling of curiosity, or the reason that makes us play, we will feel the activity just as a chore, work, or order. By knowing more about it, I believe we could make a more engaging play or specifically, game. So without further a do, let’s jump into the rabbit hole.

Another Face of the Reality, the Relief, the Doubt, and the Expectation

In my previous article (archetype in video game), I talked about the important of the battle among the reality, the relief, the doubt, and the expectation in our life journey. Even though it quite gave a jolt to my right brain, but my left brain, who always try to concern everything as information regardless the rhetorical value behind it, just gave a bitter smile and said “meh." Well, partly I agree with that, because with just the rough information as it is, it still doesn’t give a real meaning to my concern, the game design. So, before we begin talking about curiosity, I will try to clear the shape of the reality, the relief, the doubt, and the expectation in the game which surprisingly is related to the curiosity itself.

The mechanic behind chess is really fascinating. To get the goal of the game, chess provides nearly unlimited ways. In every turn, the player is given of choices which pawns that s/he will move and to which place. Looks simple, but in the eye of a professional chess player, every placement of pawns is complicated, because at the same turn s/he also needs to consider what the effect his/her action gives, and what the action s/he will need to do next based on the opponent’s response. Although has  given with a lot of options with their own ends, in the end the player will only choose one option that s/he believes could give more benefits to him/her. And if the option that s/he took fails him/her, s/he will try to consider another option that will give a better result. Looking at that, we can see the condition the chess player meet every turn is, in fact, the battle among the reality, the relief, the doubt, and the expectation. The option (consist of what pawns s/he will move, to which place, a play style, and the rest of consideration s/he built) the player takes resembles the expectation, where s/he put his/her hope to the strategy s/he created. As long as this strategy meets his/her interest, s/he wouldn’t consider the other strategies. However, when the option starts to fail him/her, s/he will be faced with a question whether the option s/he took is actually the right one, or in the other words, s/he meets the doubt. This doubt will open the player’s eyes about the real current situation. What pawn left in the board, what the position of each pawn, what the opponent really trying to do, how the situation will progress from now on, and many more. This is when the player is engulfed with the reality. The condition which is previously covered by the player’s expectation. From now on, player’s expectation will start to decrease and s/he will try to consider the other approaches. When s/he found it, s/he finally meet with the relief, the other option that s/he did not care  less before. And the cycle will be back again, with the player now puts an expectation towards the new option.

Novelty Seeking and Specific Curiosity

Based on the the concept previously described, we can see there are two activities resulted from the relation among the reality, the relief, the doubt, and the expectation. First, when we blocked by the doubt and bitten our lips at the face of the reality, it will drive us searching many available options. The other one, by gaining the relief and creating the expectation, it will lead us to focus on one option, and try as hard as we can to gain many benefits from that option. At one side, it’s an external activity, while the other is an internal activity. These two activity actually similar with the two types of curiosity, novelty seeking and specific curiosity (Berlyne, 1962).

Novelty seeking is a state inside the individual which drive the one to search for stimulation occasioned by novelty, complexity, uncertainty, or conflict, irrespective of specific questions or problems. Specific curiosity on the other hands is the orientation toward investigating specific objects, events, and problems to understand them and be challenged by them (Peterson, 2004). While novelty seeking usually leads us to search of many activities that interest us, specific curiosity makes us to focus on only one activity, to master or to know it better. From that, we can see that novelty seeking similar with the activity lead by the doubt and the reality (external) and specific curiosity with the activity comes from the relief and the expectation (internal).

Even though in his description Peterson said that novelty seeking comes without  a specific question or problem, honestly I believe he didn’t mean there are no reason behind the novelty seeking. Every time we did an activity, surely there must be some questions or problems that drive us even though in the end we could forget about that because we are too immerse with the activity. The drive could range from an important to trivial one that even we don’t aware of it. For novelty seeking, the thing that drive us I believe is the trivial one, either a problem in our current situation that we felt as boring or a question whether there is something that could interest us. In my opinion, what he means by without a specific question or problem is the problem/question that caused novelty seeking is something that irrelevant with our daily life. Something that even if we don’t get the answer wouldn’t give a great deal to our life. It’s different when we try many recipes because our boss told us to prepare a delicious dinner for an important guest with when we do it because we are curious with the limit of our skill (or the taste of dishes themselves). The same thing happens with play, which is an activity without material interest and no profit can be gained from it (Huizinga, 1955). Although nowadays there are professional players who are being paid for becoming the best, in the very essence the drive that presses him/her to go forward, to make an effective strategy, or even to exploit the play is his/her curiosity. Money or fame, only act as secondary drive, or s/he will feel it not as play again, only a chore. Even so, it’s quite hard to differentiate which drive that leads to curiosity and which doesn’t. So I think it is for the best if we treat the drive not as binary value, but as continuous, with every value leads to a certain proportion of curiosity. This drive, which leads one to explore his/her surrounding, to see another option, is shaped by the doubt and the reality. The doubt gives a problem, which will be enhanced by the reality into a question. Just as when we play chess, when our strategy doesn’t give the expected result, and lead us to question whether our selected option is the right one.

Specific curiosity, based on what Peterson said, will lead us to a challenge. Challenge usually related to a problem, something that actually we never hope for when we have found a solution. When we have found the relief (an option that we thought as the best one) and we have created the expectation (what we want to achieve by using this option) we felt that we just released from previous problem, a problem of which option is the right one, and the condition would be better after this. However, by adopting an option, actually it gives us another new problem. A problem of how to use this option, how to master it,  so it could give the expectation as we wanted. This problem, or should I say, this challenge, will help us to know more about the option we take.   

More about curiosity, through their optimal stimulation theory, Spielberg and Starr’s (1994) said there are two aspects contribute to the transition between diverse curiosity (novelty seeking) and specific curiosity. They are a person level of curiosity and anxiety toward the available options in the environment. When the curiosity higher than the anxiety, a person tends to explore every options in his/her environment (novelty seeking). However, when the curiosity is lower than the anxiety, one tends to disengage from many available options and focus on to  a certain option (specific curiosity) in order to maintain the simulation to a manageable level. While the curiosity is related to the number of options that a person take at the time, the anxiety is related to the total load of options in a person’s brain at the time. To control the number of option that a person can choose at the time is quite difficult, because if we give limited options when a person expected more, it will make the person feel being chained, stripped from his/her freedom. However, if we give a lot of options when a person can only take a number of options it will lead him/her to stress. One of the solution to this is by giving a reason to the person why he needs to take many options and to take a limited number of options at a certain time. By showing a person the doubt and the reality, it will increase his/her curiosity about the other options besides the option that s/he currently hold on, and when the curiosity is greater than his anxiety (when at that time came only from the load of the option s/he holds) s/he will do the novelty seeking. When his/her anxiety from thinking every available options already piled up, greater than the curiosity, it will make the person quits the novelty seeking. But by doing so, not only the player quits the novelty seeking, but also quits the activity itself. The other way is, by decreasing the person curiosity by showing him/her the relief and expectation, it will lead him/her to specific curiosity.

As from what have explained above, we can see that the reality, the relief, the doubt, and the expectation work as the drive toward curiosity. The doubt and the reality increase curiosity and when it’s greater than the anxiety it will drive to novelty seeking. On the other hands, the relief and the expectation decrease the curiosity and when it is lower than anxiety it will drive to specific curiosity. However, in the end, what we would gain from the curiosity?

The Law of Emotion

Every curiosity will give two kinds of results, the desired, or the undesired one. When we felt curious with a certain book cover and we decided to read it, in the end we would get either the story is interesting as what we desire based on the pretty picture of the book cover or it is actually a boring and dull book, something that is opposed with our desire. Both of the results will be accompanied with feelings, or emotions. When matched with our desire, we will feel happy, proud, or excited. However, when it didn’t match, we will feel, sad, disappointed, or even angry. That explains why every time a good play is over, rather than gives a bland expression, a player would shout a triumph, or if s/he unlucky, a curse. Emotion itself is quite hard to understand. A lot of game designer try to know how to produce a certain emotion from their game yet only a few succeed. Even though now we know that emotion resulted by curiosity, but it still in a big picture. We need to make it more specific. One of the ways that we could do is to learn how the emotion behave. One of the theories that explain it is the law of emotion from Frijda. Here, I will describe some of the laws that related to what we talk about.

The law of situational meaning stated that emotion will be produced when a person perceives a meaning behind the situation. This means the cause of emotion is a subjective matter. The same situation could elicit different emotion based on how s/he sees the situation. Further, on the law of concern, Frijda said that what makes the difference in perceiving a situation is the concern of the person. If the person doesn’t see the situation as something important, however great the situation it won’t produce an emotion to that person. But in the other hands, if the person has a concern toward the situation (it can in the form of hope or fear) s/he will produce an emotion that related to his/her concern. Also, the situation doesn’t necessary to something that already happened. In the law of apparent reality, Frijda said that the most important is the person treats the situation as real, even though it’s not manifested yet, such as the future. 

From those three laws, we can see people will always appraise the situation (has happened or not yet) with their concern as reference. The concern will work as the drive of the emotion, and the situation will work as the consideration of which emotion to produce. This finding conforms with what we stated before, which if the situation matches with the concern, it will give positive emotions and vice versa.

In the game, because our action is limited and shaped by the goal of the game, so every thing that we do is subjected by the goal. When we decided what action that we will do, it is usually based on how we perceived the current state in the game. Also, we will try to select an action that we feel appropriate in the current situation that would make us closer to the goal of the game. So in the game, the goal works as our concern, and the state of the game as the situation. One thing to note, the game state must accommodate both wanted (fit with the goal) and unwanted one (unfit with the goal). Also, the player must be able to change the game state with their meaningful action. By meaningful, I mean the action value should depend on the situation. If an action gives positive effect regardless the current situation, the player will surely abuse that action, which lead that they are not taking consideration of the game current situation. For example, in chess, moving a pawn is the allowed action in the game. However, the value of moving the pawn is depended on the situation. If the player move the pawn to check his/her opponent, the action is considered as one which will bring the player to his/her goal. In the other hands, if the player still keeps marching forward even though his/her king is in danger, it was an unwise action, and surely will bring the player farther with his/her goal.

Previously, it was stated that the doubt and the reality will create novelty seeking while the relief and the expectation will lead to the specific curiosity. Also, the reality will follow the doubt and the expectation will follow relief. The reality, the relief, the doubt, and the expectation is actually  situations that we assess based on our goal. The difference between them is while the doubt and the relief show a current situation, the reality and the expectation show a probable situation that will happen if there are no change in the current situation. The change itself is shaped by the use of a certain action.

(a) the doubt will lead to worse situation as predicted by the reality if there are no change happens in situation

(b) the relief will lead to better situation as predicted by the expectation if there are no change happens in situation

However, why we need to provide unwanted situation if it will only give the player negative emotions? Why we don’t just stick with the desired situation, a situation which conforms with the goal? The answer can be found from the rest of the law of emotion. The law of change said that the elicitation of emotion doesn’t depend entirely by the value of the situation. Of course desired situation will give positive emotions, and also true for undesired situation, which will give negative emotions. However, the most important is the actual or expected change of the desired or undesired situation. If the new situation better than the last, it will elicit positive emotions. However, when the new situation worse than previous one, it will create negative emotions. That means, if the situation is worse than the last even though it conforms with the desire, it still gives negative emotions. The other way around also works, when the new situation better than the last, even it still doesn’t fit with our desire, it will gives positive emotions. Continued by the law of habituation, being exposed by the same situation for a longer time could decrease the impact it gives to the emotion. Unless we get a situation with greater/lesser value towards our concern, pleasure will gradually wear off, and hardship will lose it poignancy. Change happens because there is a difference in the value between situations, with each situation value is obtained by making a relation with a frame reference, as the law of comparative feeling stated. This frame reference could come from many sources, such as fate, expectation, condition of other, desire, and many more. Before, it was stated that being exposed with the same situation could decrease the effect it gives to the emotion. In that kind of situation, we became used to with the situation, so it won’t give effect as big as it gives for the first time. The law of hedonic asymmetry stated that the time that is required for us to get accustomed depend on the type of emotion. Negative emotions usually last quite long before we get used to it, or worse, it never happen. In contrast, positive emotions depend so much on the change. Without a change, positive emotions will surely disappear overtime with an exposure to the same situation over and over. In the other words, if there are no changes in the situation, the time that is needed for us to dissipate negative emotions is longer than positive emotions. Some people believe that time will heal emotion. But Frijda disagrees with that. Based on the law of conservation of emotional momentum, an emotion will persist inside someone until there are another situation that modifies the emotion, whether it is the same situation that diminishes the emotional value or a different situation that brings a change in emotional value.

From all of those, there is one important keyword. It is change. Without a change in the situation around him/her, a person will lose his/her current emotion or retain his/her emotion (however, I found that it was impossible. Even though the situation around us didn’t change, but because our senses always receive a new stimulus every second and treat it as something different than the previous, it makes us perceive the same situation as a totally new situation). This answer our previous question. If we only give a desired situation (which gives positive emotions at first), the player will get used to it, and the emotion will decrease and before long it will disappear. Of course, we can still always give a better situation than the previous, so there is a change that leads to increase in positive emotions. However, the problem is, to always do it is extremely difficult. Because before we know it, the difference that we need to give has already increased sharply. Thus, makes our effort grow exponentially. Worse, if the concern is something that has a static value, it will decrease the play time. It happens because we must always give the player a more better situation where a better situation means closer to the goal. That is why, in a play or game a change between desired and undesired situation must happen alternately.       

(a) A graph where only provides desired situation

(b) A graph where provides both desired and undesired situation alternately

Now, let’s combine what we got so far. To refresh, here what we already knew:

1.    The doubt and the reality drive people to novelty seeking, while the relief and the expectation drive         to specific curiosity.

2.    The doubt and the relief show a current situation.

3.    The reality and the expectation show a probable situation that will happen if there are no change in         the current situation.

4.    If curiosity greater than anxiety, novelty seeking will happen.

5.    The other way around, if curiosity lesser than anxiety, specific curiosity will occur.

6.    Situation can be changed via action.

7.    Every situation has its value regarding how good/bad it fulfills a person’s concern.

8.    Change in the situation is the primary cause of emotion elicitation.

9.    Positive emotions tend to disappear if continuously come from the same situation for a longer time          while negative emotions sustain.

Now, let’s map all of them into the previous graph. Because the graph has a repeated of increase and decrease state, for clarity, we will only inspect one increase and one decrease state (one mountain).

Here we can see a person who at [A] will meet with the relief, find the action that solves his/her problem. Meeting the relief is a desired situation, because relief will help the person closer to his/her goal and give positive emotions to the person. From this until [B], the person will always create the expectation, hoping a better situation than the current. Throughout this process, the person will only care about the action that s/he found when s/he met the relief or in the other words, s/he will in the state of specific curiosity. In this state, a person’s curiosity decrease, and also by thinking only one action at the time make the anxiety level go down too (even so, the decrease speed of the curiosity is faster than the anxiety which makes the level of curiosity still lower than anxiety). As long as the new situations (every point between [A] and [B]) meet his/her expectation, they will  give him/her positive emotions. Engulfs with the positive emotions for a longer time, the increase of emotion will start to drop until it stop. Not feeling with another positive emotions, the person will arrive at [B], where s/he meets the doubt. At this situation, the person will start questioning the action that s/he has done till now. Thus, makes his/her curiosity will start to increase. From this situation, the person will get negative emotions and consider the other options, even though s/he is still progressing with the current action, which makes his/her anxiety start to rise. Also, from here s/he will see the reality that his/her current action actually not good enough, and s/he needs to find a better one. That reality leads him/her to do the novelty seeking. Until the person finds the correct action, s/he will get negative emotions, as shown by the decrease in trend. Finally, if the person finds the right action, s/he will arrive at [C] and meet the relief again. Next, the cycle will be repeated again and again until the person arrives at his/her concern.

So far we feel optimistic a person will surely get his/her concern. However, what if s/he never find the relief, which will rise his/her emotion? Does his emotion will continue falling until hit the value of minus infinity? What is the emotion with the value minus infinity anyway? The answer to this question can be found in the other two laws of emotion, the law of the greatest gain and the law of lightest load. The law of greatest gain stated that people will always seek an option or select an action that maximize emotional gain (positive emotions). In contrast, the law of lightest load stated that when making a choice, people will always choose one which has minimum emotional lost (negative emotions). It’s actually quite similar with the economy, where people will always compare options in the term of their gain and lost, and try to find the one which gives a greater result. So even in the hardest situation and there are no escape, people will always try to search other options in the hope the new situation, although doesn’t release him/her from the harsh situation, can lighten the negative emotions that s/he will get. Also, even though the person didn’t find another better options, from the law of habituation we knew that in time, the person will get accustomed with the bad situation, and the emotional load will start to decrease until it stop declining. Although the law of hedonic asymmetry said that in order that to happen it will take a very long time, at least it won’t reach a minus infinity value. By combining this into our graph, we get the below picture.

So now we understand how curiosity happens in people’s mind. However, what we gain by knowing this? How will it impact to our concern, to game design? Well, I always believe a game or a play first and foremost should facilitate how people behave. However immerse it is, it is only a tool that people use to gain a certain need. It must not dictate how people should behave. They are not a lab rat in the skinner box experiment. By respecting our players as a human, I believe that they will not only feel fun but also won’t regret anything when they decided to put down the joystick in their hands.

Yet if that so, why bother creating a game or play? Hasn’t our real life already works and accommodates it? Game or play has the same power as story, where it can cut the boring part and jump directly to the interesting one. Imagine how dull it would be if Sir Arthur Conan Doyle decided to put the everyday life of Sherlock Holmes, including the day when there are no case. Game or play can bring order to the chaos of our daily life and shape it into a more structured way as what we hope for. That is why the job of game designer is not to shape the behavior of the player, but to highlight the interesting part of our life and present it in an astonishing way.

Christopher Peterson (2004) said that a curiosity should be generated, sustained, and integrated. We already knew that curiosity can be generated by presenting a situation that a person concerns and giving him options to manipulate the situation that s/he can choose. However how about the sustained and integrated? Sustained means that a person’s curiosity should be maintained through his/her activity so it won’t disappear. If a person lost his/her curiosity, it will lead him/her to quit the activity. In our graph, it means another mountain must be created after a person finished one. However, the next mountain must lead the player closer to the goal. The purpose is not only to create a progressive experience, but also to integrate the previous curiosity with the next. By doing so, when the player creates another curiosity, he doesn’t do that by totally dropping the previous curiosity. A person gains the next curiosity by looking to the previous curiosity’s weaknesses and strengths and use them as the requirements for the selected option for the next curiosity.       

Curiosity always related to madness. Doing the thing that a normal person wouldn’t dare to do, doing the thing that only gives a trivial result. Despite always trying to deny it, every person must have experience it. whether small or big, whether  in reality or fiction. If you’re still unsure, here I give a part of talk between Alice and Cheshire Cat to prove it,

“But I don’t want to go among mad people,” Alice remarked.

“Oh, you can’t help that,” said the Cheshire Cat: ” we are mad here. I’m mad, you’re mad”. 

“How do you know I’m mad?” said Alice.

“You must be,” said the Cheshire Cat, “or you wouldn’t have come here.”