Invented by out-of-work architect Alfred Butts during the Great Depression, Scrabble is a staple of word lovers’ lives. The popularity of this beloved game took off in the mid-1950s and has been an essential part of the canon of classic board games ever since.
To determine Scrabble’s tile values, Alfred Butts carefully analyzed letter frequency in various periodicals, including the front page of the New York Times. Butts’ original design aimed to create a game that would balance skill with luck, which he believed to be an important aspect of the games he loved.
But does Butts’ original analysis stand up to rigorous computational analysis? Two researchers recently developed programs to process and analyze far more data and variables than were considered by Butts 75 years ago. Director of Research at Google Peter Norvig came up with a model for letter-frequency counts based on the Google Books English-language corpora. (See Norvig’s research.) More directly related to Scrabble, Joshua Lewis (a post-doc at the University of California, San Diego’s Cognitive Science Department) proposed new tile values considering three variables: the frequency of letters in English, the frequency of letters by word length (the most valuable word lengths in Scrabble being two-, three-, seven-, and eight-letter words), and the ease with which one can play a letter (the blank tile and S are far easier to play than Q). Using a program he created called Valett that accounts for these concerns, Lewis proposes 14 tile-value changes. These include X changing from eight to five points, Z changing from 10 to six points, and J changing from eight to six points. (See Lewis’ full findings.)
This sort of research is nothing new; John Chew, co-president of the North American Scrabble Player’s Association, says he gets at least one proposal for altering tile values every year. In a blog post in response to the rethinking of Scrabble tile values, Chew calls Lewis’ system a “catastrophic outrage” explaining that “[y]ou’d end up with a game that was…closer to just rolling a die to determine the winner.” Lewis maintains that “Valett is an attempt to keep the intentional luck in the game,” such as the blank tiles, “and remove the unintentional luck that has crept in over time as the use of English has changed.”
Scrabble’s manufacturers will not let their original tile values crumble under the pressure of this new research. Stefan Fatsis, competitive Scrabble player and author of Word Freak: Heartbreak, Triumph, Genius and Obsession in the World of Competitive Scrabble Players, told NPR in a recent interview that he supports the decision to not change the tile values, stating that these changes would “flatten out the values,” reducing “the element of luck” and making the game “more boring.”
What do you think? Should Scrabble tiles retain their original value? Or are the tile values in need of an overhaul in order to reflect the changes in English since Alfred Butts first calculated letter frequency in the 1930s?
I think that since Scrabble is a classic board game and lots of people have the original version the point values should’t be changed. That would confuse TONS of people who love the game. I also think that a lot of people who would buy the changed version to replace their old, worn-down version might keep playing the old way. Also on game night new users and old users might argue consistently about the point values.
I think the only overhaul required is the American Webster system. “z” as a letter continues to be a rarely used commodity in the Oxford tradition and thus should retain its status.
The US seeks to Americanise everything, even English. Perhaps a better course of action would be Scrabble For Americans: The Limited Edition. Leave the original alone.
I don’t really care, I just play it and suck at it.
Yes, I do think an overhaul would be beneficial…BUT….I also think access to an on line “Scrabble Dictionary” to match the computational analysis would be even better!
Your link to Lewis’ full findings is dead (and this article is barely a month old)
they should not change the values of scrabble tiles. i hve been playing scrabble all my life and it would totally mess up my game if the values were changed. in a short summary: DONT CHANGE THE VALUES
leave it
Why doesn’t someone hold some tournaments using these different letter values and see the player’s reactions?
No. The game as it stands is fine. There is a pillar of tradition behind it. If the Lewis camp wants to make changes, then do so with a different game. And while you’re at it, adjust the size of the board, tile distribution, location, count and value of multipliers, and the dictionary (e.g., ENABLE).
Leave ‘em alone! I don’t play “Scrabble” as such, but “Words with Friends” daily, and the thrill of playing the odd X, J, Z, or Q makes the game more exciting.
Leave it alone. I can see that some letters, like z, are more common today, but how many of those added appearances in print are in names of foreign places, words which cannot be used in Scrabble because they are proper nouns?
I believe Scrabble is perfect just the way it is!!!
Five, six, and six? Lest ye forget we have a limited number of values to begin with…and the other tiles are already all 1s, 2s, and 3s!
Leave the excitement in the game, please. Don’t take that from us here as well…Please..
I wish the Scrabble tiles retain their original value. It will be much helpful to new generation of players.
If it aint broke, don’t fix it.
Yes original value should remain. Don’t mess with a very good thing! However are know there have been many changes in English since 1930, maybe you should.
Have a great day!
Barbara
Ah, yes. The X has been well-prized by Scrabble players and is often played on a triple letter space, parallel to another word, for 52 or more points. While it does seem overvalued in this respect (the ease with which it can be played for a high score), I would not want its score to be reduced to 5. This would make it only slightly better than a K. Also, laying down those 52-point X plays is one of the sublime joys of Scrabble. Reducing the score of X to 5 would take away this joy.
The excitement in Scrabble is getting to use the higher valued letters. Who cares what the actual frequency of the letters is. Some are still more difficult to use than others and you know it!
There has got to be some challenge in order to actually enjoy playing the game….PLEASE….do not change the points.
i like scrabble
Scrabble is partly a game of luck, but a sound lexical knowledge, a sense of sacrifice, an ounce of risk, a stable decision-making process and a good logical mind can even out that luck, or even overcome it. Having high-value letters is one thing, but being able to get them where you need them is another. I don’t think the game needs to be changed in any way. And besides, half the fun of losing is being able to say that you didn’t get the Q, the Z, the X, or the J, and you got stuck with the K at the end.
Leave the tiles alone! There is such a thing as legacy and Scrabble deserves it.
Is nothing safe from the onslaught of computer analysis?
Let sleeping dogs lie.
balderdash! they haven’t a clue. get a life and leave our scrabble alone!
What about the players wit and intellect instead of luck? Leave the point systems as it is.
“the most valuable word lengths in Scrabble being two-, three-, seven-, and eight-letter words”
Can someone explain this? Why would a 2-letter word be worth more than a 5-letter word?
Thanks.
I say leave the tiles as they are. Not only would it make the game more boring, it would also rob people of of those perfect, magical moments when you realize you can use an X or a Z on a Triple Word Score tile.
Maybe Lewis should design his own board game.
leave as it is.
Glad I’m not related to Albert Butts…
Webster, Webster, Webster
Why “fix” something that isn’t broken? Leave Scrabble alone! (And KEEP the iron in Monopoly – just add the cat!)
@Jennifer – If you re-read the first sentence (wherein it states that the game was developed by an out-of-work architect during the Great Depression) you would realize (assuming you know any history) that the game is, in fact, American to begin with. It’s impossible to “Americanise” something that is already American. And our great country has always maintained a seperate English than the U.K. and other such countries. Evident in our use of “z” instead of “s” (i.e. Americanize vs. Americanise) and our preference for a simple “o” instead of the unneccessary “ou” (i.e. color vs. colour). My point is that your point has no basis. Sorry but that’s my good ‘ole American opinion.
Yes it is…..
Leave Scrabble as it is. Changing the values as suggested would create less opportunity for high scoring words, and therefore less challenging.
Haven’t these people got more important things to do than trying to change the point scoring system of a board game – emphasis on game.
The tile values are not the problem. The liberalization of the dictionary to allow non-words like “ZA” (slang) and “QI” (foreign) as well as phonetic spellings of letters like “ZEE” are the problem. Get rid of the “freebies” like these and the tile values make perfect sense again.
I have been playing Scrabble all my life and I believe that it is perfect the way it is. Older generations may not understand he change in tiles especially anyone with memory problems. They may not remember the new tiles, but still remember the old ones. The values placed on the tiles z, x, and j are what keep the game fun. Having such vast outliers in a game such as this allows more anticipation and interest when playing the game. This allows a more technology based generation to still enjoy and revel about the well known and loved classic, Scrabble. Do not change a thing it will only cause more stress, money, and could possibly lead to the loss of many customers. No one will want to go out and buy the new board game and their old tiles will get mixed in, all resulting in a large mess. If the change does occur I will not buy the new game and will ban it from my household.
The tiles are fine as they are. The high score possibility adds some risk and excitement to the game, and more satisfaction when the tiles are used. And, I agree, Lauryn! Poor Mr. Butts…
NO! Don’t change the Scrabble tile values. I play all the time and would find this very disconcerting.
I believe the tile values should stay the same; some things need to stay traditional and original. I agree that the change would reduce the challenge and make the game boring. As a knowledge of language is needed to score well, one needs to learn in order to win. If we just dumb down the level of acceptable words and raise the tile values the playing field will become more level and those who do not strive to acquire knowledge will be unjustifiably rewarded. Let’s not redesign everything we do to appease the least common denominator but continue to encourage learning and enlightenment. I for one am always challenged by the game and win or lose I learn at least three new words every time I play, therefore, I win what the valuable prize in the process.
“the most valuable word lengths in Scrabble being two-, three-, seven-, and eight-letter words”
Can someone explain this? Why would a 2-letter word be worth more than a 5-letter word?
==============
Two-letter words are valuable because they enable you to lay your play alongside another word, creating a handful of two-letter words in addition to the word you put down. The same concept applies to three-letter words, to a lesser extent.
I suppose that the theory is this should increase the point value of letters like “C” or “V”, since you can’t make two-letter words from them? But that would just help flatten out the score by awarding more points to words containing those letters, helping make up for the difference between those words and other plays that created a series of two-letter words.
I’d have to see how it played, but if the only difference is decreasing the rarest tiles’ point values, it just makes it less exciting. There’s a reason the game has lasted so long – it’s pretty solid the way it is.
Sorry, I mistyped before. I meant to finish with “I win the most valuable prize in the process.”
Today I learned: That two contrary arguments can be used to argue for the same thing (i.e. that changing letter values would both make the game rely too much on luck and take the element of luck away). Games relying almost exclusively on skill (like sports matches) and games with close scores and thus high emotion are more boring than ones relying heavily on luck and whether or not you get the ridiculously easy-to-use, high-scoring X or other high-scoring letters. People would rather stick with comforting traditions that are the same since they were kids than undergo any beneficial change down to the minor level of a board game.
If people want to change the way Scrabble works… Oh, wait. They did. It’s called Words with Friends. Blech. Let the people who want to change letter values play that instead.
And in response to “Confused” who posted: “’the most valuable word lengths in Scrabble being two-, three-, seven-, and eight-letter words’
Can someone explain this? Why would a 2-letter word be worth more than a 5-letter word?”
Two letter words enable a player to add another word parallel to an existing one already on the board. So, the knowledge of them is invaluable in gaining more points than just adding a word perpendicularly.
HOSPITAL
—-TALISMAN
This example gives the words IT, TA, AL, and LI in addition to TALISMAN. Hope that helps.
well, that didn’t line up correctly…
HOSPITAL
xxxxTALISMAN
okay – just move TALISMAN over until it starts under the I in HOSPITAL
i think they should stay the same, ” If it’s not wrong don’t fix it.”
Just raising a bunch of brabble in thoughts of changing the beloved SCRABBLE game. Leave it alone!
didnt take time to read it just looked at the comment… sounds like it’s not so good.
Make two versions.
@Confused:
The distinction here I believe is the difference between the words “value” and “worth.” Two- and three-letter words are valuable, for example, at the end of the game when you’re trying to get rid of tiles, or when you want to play a word (instead of exchanging tiles) but don’t have a good selection of letters. They may not be “worth” more, but they help you in the game, nonetheless. Whereas four- and five-letter words require you to have a better selection of tiles to form those words, but usually don’t pay off in point value, comparatively, as the two- and three-letter words, except on rare occasions. That’s how I understood it, anyway!
And leave the point values alone! Unless you want to up the value of s….just kidding. 
I think they should be left alone, it is a lot harder to use Xs, Ys, and Zs, therefore we should get more points for using them.
Reproducing the comment I fully agree with.
I think the only overhaul required is the American Webster system. “z” as a letter continues to be a rarely used commodity in the Oxford tradition and thus should retain its status.
The US seeks to Americanise everything, even English. Perhaps a better course of action would be Scrabble For Americans: The Limited Edition. Leave the original alone.
Well all I’m saying is that the last names in this are very unfortunate. Butts and Fatsis.
If something isn’t broken, don’t fix it.
watevz persons i agree with u lauryn i dont want 2 have the last name of butts
dabe i can agree. peoples PLZ LEAVE AS IS!!!!!!!!!!
hi sorry wat hpnd dabe was just here trst moi
you can line up 2 letter words like :
g o
o n
r e
e
Let us not change the value system on the basis that miscreants choose to soil the English language with poor grammar and idle minds. I prefer to work for my seven-letter words.
OH lala!
old one is better
no
leave as it is.
““the most valuable word lengths in Scrabble being two-, three-, seven-, and eight-letter words”
Can someone explain this? Why would a 2-letter word be worth more than a 5-letter word?”
Confused – I imagine that it’s because two and three letter words are most easily played, while seven- and eight-letter words potentially get the 50 point bonus for using all your tiles. Still, I almost always try to go for the longest word I can. 
The best game for the young and old.I love to play all day long but of late have no access.From Wa Ghana,West Africa.
You can have two-sided tiles with both new and old points! Color both sides differently for easy identification.
What next, change the values of Monopoly properties? Allow pawns to move backwards?
I agree that if Alfred had today’s data resources, he very well may have come up with somewhat different point values. But really, the debate is immaterial, because each player has an equal chance of drawing a high-scoring tile. Reducing tile point value would only result in reducing point totals for a round, and would have the disadvantage of forcing experienced Scrabble players to adjust the automatic calculation that goes on as they consider point values for different options. An added disadvantage is that game scores under a new point system could not be compared one-to-one with game scores under the old point system, which I’m sure would wreak havoc in all sorts of Scrabble venues.
[...] ‘Tile-Values’ — Related to Scrabble — Or the subterfuge of a Scrabble-Cheater — What’s in the name of an over eater. — Change the Values — Change the Game — By any other given Name — Scrabble Lewis — Scrabble Butts — Scrabble Stefan Fatsis Nuts. –>>L.T.Rhyme This entry was posted in DICTCOMHOTWORD, L.T.Rhyme and tagged LT, LTRhyme, the HOT WORD on February 8, 2013 by LTRhyme. [...]
>>
and the ease with which one can play a letter (the blank tile and S are far easier to play than Q).
The new algorithm is flawed as ease of play is based the occurance frequencies of the letters within the canon of the vocabulary. Thus frequency is really being considered twice.
–Allen
.
Scrabble is a delightful game. The egregious Words with Friends has an extremely unusual system as to what “words” are permitted and which are not. It allows Greek letters, many foreign words and proper names but doesn’t accept dozens of legitimate (and common) English words. Based on the experience with Words with Friends, I would strongly advocate Scrabble staying as it is. As many others said, if it aint broke, don’t fix it.
I would say that Norvig and Lewis really don’t have enough to do.
I agree to two prior opinions that were more aligned with my way of thinking. I am a Mexican guy, so I used to play Spanish Scrabble – and there are some obvious differences in letter values. – However, every time I play with my family, we use rae.es (supported Spanish-online dictionary)… that’s the first point I agree to… Either Scrabble company’s or Scrabble’s Player Association should add an online dictionary joint to the game. Second, special Scrabble versions – to me; from my limited-&-non-well-rounded outlook – sounds like a viable new target for other consumer markets. And, finally, everyone happy haha.
Sounds like they’re taking a page from the Windows manual.
Once people get used to it and it works well, change it so the makers can sell a bazillion of the new version and make a ton of money.
“Can someone explain this? Why would a 2-letter word be worth more than a 5-letter word?”
Because you can play a two letter word across in order to play a word down to a triple word score.
Oh my God! I love Scrabble. The Scrabble dictionary should add common foreing words.
While I dont play scrabble.Iam logophil.These comments are enjoyable. and my comments are ‘It aint broke.Dont fix it.’
While that’s extremely neat, I like the game how it is. Why not leave well enough alone?
I have less of a problem with letter valuations than I do with letter distribution. While I wouldn’t mind seeing devaluations in the Z to equal the X and the J, and increasing the V to equal the K; I’d REALLY like to see the number of I’s to decrease from 9 to 6 or even 5. I seem to be forever stalked by useless and multiple freakin’ I’s.
lol
I don’t think the values should be changed. The purpose for the larger values is for letters that hold less power in our vocabulary. For example: R, S & T are common in more words in the English language than X & Z because X & Z create fewer words. The higher values are bonuses to those that create words including these letters due to the difficulty. It isn’t as much an element of luck as we think. To really get to the bottom of this, someone would have to go through the word counts of each letter and explore all possibilities before considering changing the values. They are just fine to me.
I think there should be two versions to satisfy everybody.
Let’s leave the original as it is if “they” want just put out a newer game. I am a big fan of words with friends and believe not only skill but a good speller sure is a help in the game.
I think they should leave the values the same. True, I do make a lot of “cheap” plays such as qi going 2 directions with the q on triple letter. BUT some of my opponents are learning not to play a good vowel next to that premium square when one of those high-pt. tiles is still at large. It’s a good skill to have.
It should be kept the same. If Butts created it to have a variable of luck it should be left that way. He’s the creator of it so he wanted it to be that way. Plus it would be more boring if it had very little luck. If you want an all strategy game then go buy it.
Rule uniformity contributes to Scrabble’s ‘accumulated’ popularity. Alterations make a different game, and consequent ‘fragmented’ popularity. That’s the problem with “squirreling,” you send it off into oblivion. Example: The Constitution as a “living document.” Hmm, let’s see, do we play Scrabble or do we play “Amending A Living Scrabble?” Let’s have both, one for stability, and one for ? Reality is agreement/disagreement. Scrabblers just wanna have fun…
Hi, what is it with Americans wanting change everything even games now. Leave well enough alone. Especially the value system. Enjoy
play the game and would not like the game to be change. momzig
LEAVE IT ALONE!! Make your own alternative game if you so choose, but don’t interfere in a perfectly good game as is… Not everything needs to be ‘contemporary’.
Then I suppose you’ll want to refashion Ludo and Checkers, & Snakes and Ladders, etc.
I have played scrabble for 40 years including 1 I bought for the computer. The game is old but very popular and successful so why change it. Get creative and make up a new game. Leave ours alone.
I usually win when I play the game against my girlfriend. According to this article the intent behind changing games tiles regarding removing chance would guarantee that I always win, and we would eventually playing. I am NOT going back to having The Bachelor on Monday nights as my only option for entertainment.
Sorry… “STOP playing “.. ( previous comment)
NO WAY ARE THEY GONNA EVEN THINK ABOUT CHANGING TILE VALUES IN SCRABBLE!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Its a classic, leave it alone. Coke was changed to the new Coke, and it was a failure. It was changed back to classic Coke. don’t mess with what works
Yeah, let’s
For me, V should worth more than K, J should worth 9 points, and because of X can go with all vowels (ax, ex, xi, ox and xu) X should maybe worth only 7 points. I think the amount of E and I should cut down.
I agree with Ronda Callens–”If it’s not broken, don’t fix it”. Scrabble is a classic! It shouldn’t be changed! People would keep on forgetting the new values, the game would be less interesting, and tiles would get mixed together, resulting in one big MESS.
Words have changed since Albert Butts’ time. Letters are used more often (and in some cases less often). The tile values should be changed to reflect this.
“If it’s not broken, don’t fix it!” For goodness sake don’t change the tile values! Scrabble is a classic! If the letter values are changed, the game will be less interesting, people will keep on getting the values mixed up, and the tiles themselves will get mixed up, resulting in one big fat MESS.
Oh, and I agree with Lauryn–I would NOT want my last name to be Butts. : )- ^_^
Change the tile values. Some letters are more common nowadays. It makes sense to change the letter values.
Let the consumer decide. Make a new game with new rules and sell it along with the old. My bet (and my choice) is that NewScrabble will go the way of NewCoke.
PLEASE leave Scrabble alone; listen to the comments of those who actually play the game, not of those who bloviate without sincere and vested interest. Lewis can make up his own game with his own rules or Scrabble can create a new version for dissidents. Playing Scrabble has been–and still is–the ONE game my family plays together regularly for over 50 years. My 80+ year-old parents play together almost every day to keep their minds sharp and engaged. On visits, their children and grandchildren enjoy playing too; they think, assimilate, learn new words and can all add points and scores the old way–with a pad and pencil! Changing the value of the tiles may not alter the essence of the game, but what’s next? Part of Scrabble’s allure is its nostalgia; it doesn’t need to be modernized or fixed. It’s a (wonderful) game.
The game is a classic… you cannot change the letter value. They are that way for a reason–to make the game more challenging and to add a bit of luck. Without that the game would not be as exciting!
I think “K” should be more points.
It really won’t matter. SCRABBLE-lovers will adapt their strategy. There are plenty of knock-off games out there with different point values already.
Maybe SCRABBLE should offer SCRABBLE Classic and New SCRABBLE . The original older games might just become a collectors edition. People could choose which game to play online or off line.
Leave it ….why change something which has worked for years and gives lots of people a lot of pleasure.
can you find any three letter word thas is has a meaning in this word search.
Q X E R T Y U I B P
A S D F G H J OH
Z X C V B N J
If you don’t like the point values in scrabble, make your own game, don’t change something that somebody else designed.
ALFRED Butts invented Scrabble. NOT, Albert Butts.
Your articles mentions the correct name one time, and gets it wrong every other time.
Come on! This is a website dedicated to words and CORRECT information. Fact check folks, fact check!
I’d never want Scrabble to get changed no matter What!!!!!!!!!!!
I’d never want Scrabble to get changed no matter What!!!!!!!!!!!
Also because Scrabble a great game why would they what to change it.
I’d never want Scrabble to get changed no matter What!!!!!!!!!!!
Also because Scrabble a great game why would they what to change it.
That’s why I wouldn’t want people to convince the owners to change Scrabble
I don’t think it should change. Scrabble IS a classic board game, as others have said. ‘X’ is still not frequently used, so… why should the value be changed to 5? Same deal with ‘Z’. Why change the value to 6 when mainly proper nouns, which are ineligible for game use, are the ‘Z’ words? Times have changed, but language has not changed THAT much.
Keep it the same. Vintage is always cool. Diehard players have strategies that work.
I think we should check and see if Lewis is on Hasbro’s payroll. What a boon to the game maker to change tile values and oblige all die-hard scrabblers to buy new games. Nothing like built in obsolescence to pump revenue.
I play Scrabble all the time. There is nothing more frustrating then playing a whole bunch of really awesome 5 and 6 point words, and getting utterly beat by someone who plays nothing but qi, za, jo, and xi on all the triple letter spots.
I don’t consider Scrabble a “luck” game, though, and am in favor of anything that rewards good words and removes cheesy playing.
Thanks to everyone who answered my question! : )
In my opinion it wouldn’t change the game as it’s played whatsoever. By increasing or decreasing value on some or all tiles the opponents score would also reflect those changes, if you lose, you still lose and so on.
Invent your own word game and leave the Scrabble the way it is .
Just leave the game how it is…its a wonderful game
Wow – so much enthusiasm. Or would stubbornness be more correct? I didn’t have much opinion on this “issue” until I read a few of the comments. When this game was first made, 75 years ago, different words were more common, more in use and the scores suited that. Guess what – time changes and language does with it. I do English Language at school (that’s why i was reading this article in the first place) and I have come to realise that English is an extremely versatile, flexible and sponge-like way of speaking. So…. yeah, Scrabble should be able to change the tile scores if they want: it would be like the game made all over again completely in mode.
Gosh – I found something else to add to my argument. I just read something like “language hasn’t changed THAT much”. Yes, it has. Or else you haven’t. Changing Scrabble letter scores will (okay, in no huge way, but in a small yet effective way) induce the younger generation (like me!) to play this game. Although many of you have written it is “classic” game, it won’t last forever. This issue has brought up a chance to keep it alive that much longer.
I totally agree with the critic of the current official Scrabble dictionary: if we take out what we call ‘Scrabble Words’ at our house (namely, words no one really uses that aren’t really even English in many cases, but that let you use the X and Q and Z too easily like XI and QI and ZA) it would correct the main problem with the supposedly excessive value of those letters. Then the actual game can be left alone!
O k is another word used for okay.Hence I think ( ok should be ascrabble word)
ok is a common everyday word yet it is not a scrabble word.
Am i the only one who thinks a last name of Butts is funny?
i don’t think they should change everything. It would be really annoying to lots of people and to me the old values seem fine. I agree with an earlier comment about making a “challange” edition with the new values. With the new up to date values the luck factor goes down making the game really boring.
The key to a successful Scrabble game is utilizing well-placed 2-letter words to attach a full word to another full word…maximizing points.
You actually make it seem so easy with your presentation but I find this topic to be actually something which I think I would never understand.
It seems too complicated and extremely broad for me.
I’m looking forward for your next post, I’ll try to get the
hang of it!
I agree that the letter values should be changed considering the fact that they are outdated and need to be more contemporary.