評(píng)論
打印
WRITING about your feelings, a practice long embraced by teenagers and folk singers, is now attracting attention as a path to good health. And a recent study suggests that reflecting on your emotions could help you get over a breakup. But, one of its authors says, journaling can have its downsides.
寫下自己的感想，這種長期被青少年和民謠歌手所采納的做法，目前正作為一種保持健康的途徑，吸引著人們的注意力。最近的一項(xiàng)研究表明，反思自己的情緒能幫你渡過分手時(shí)期。但是，論文的一名作者稱，記日記可能會(huì)產(chǎn)生消極影響。
Is structured self-reflection, as some suggest, a healthy tuneup for the heart and head — or can it make hurt feelings worse?
有人建議進(jìn)行有條理的自我反思，但這樣做會(huì)讓身心得到健康的調(diào)整——還是會(huì)讓受傷害的感覺更加強(qiáng)烈？
For a study published in the journal Social Psychological and Personality Science, Grace M. Larson, a graduate student at Northwestern University, and David A. Sbarra, a psychology professor at the University of Arizona, looked at self-reflection through a speaking exercise. They recruited 210 young people (they ranged in age from 17 to 29) who had recently broken up with their partners, and then split this brokenhearted sample into two groups.
美國西北大學(xué)(Northwestern University)的研究生格雷斯·M·拉爾森(Grace M. Larson)和亞利桑那大學(xué)(University of Arizona)的心理學(xué)教授戴維·A·斯巴拉(David A. Sbarra)在《社會(huì)心理與人格科學(xué)》(Social Psychological and Personality Science)期刊上發(fā)表了一篇論文，為此，他們通過自述對(duì)自我反思進(jìn)行了研究。他們招募了210名最近與伴侶分手的年輕人（年齡從17歲到29歲不等），然后把這些極度傷心的研究對(duì)象分成兩組。
One filled out a questionnaire on how they were feeling, then completed a four-minute assignment in which they were asked to talk into a recording device, free-associating in response to questions like, “When did you first realize you and your partner were headed toward breaking up?” This group repeated the same exercise three, six and nine weeks later.
其中一組需要填寫關(guān)于個(gè)人感受的調(diào)查問卷，然后再對(duì)著一臺(tái)錄音設(shè)備講話4分鐘，對(duì)于“你從什么時(shí)候開始意識(shí)到自己和伴侶即將分手”等問題，他們可以自由聯(lián)想。這組人在3周、6周和9周之后，重復(fù)了同樣的任務(wù)。
The second group filled out the questionnaire at the beginning and the end of the nine-week study period (they did the speaking exercise only once, after filling out their final questionnaires).
第二組則在最初和為期9周的研究即將結(jié)束時(shí)填寫了調(diào)查問卷（他們只在填完最后的調(diào)查問卷后，做過一次自述）。
Ms. Larson and Dr. Sbarra found that the breakup sufferers in the first group experienced greater improvements in “self-concept clarity” than those in the second. Dr. Sbarra defines self-concept clarity as “the degree to which you understand yourself as a person.” He and Ms. Larson measured it by asking subjects how much they agreed with statements like “I do not feel like myself anymore” or “I have regained my identity.” Much of our understanding of ourselves can be bound up in our relationships with our partners, Dr. Sbarra explained — and if we break up, it can be hard to answer questions like “Who am I?” or “Who are my friends?” or “How should I spend my time?” The speaking exercise helped people, he explained, because “it improved their sense of self independent of their former partner.”
拉爾森和斯巴拉發(fā)現(xiàn)，與第二組因?yàn)榉质侄鴤涫苷勰サ娜讼啾?，第一組人在“自我概念清晰性”方面有更大的改善。根據(jù)斯巴拉的定義，自我概念清晰性指的是“人對(duì)自身存在的理解程度”。他和拉爾森通過詢問研究對(duì)象對(duì)一些觀點(diǎn)的認(rèn)可程度，對(duì)這一點(diǎn)進(jìn)行了評(píng)測(cè)。這些觀點(diǎn)包括“我覺得自己已經(jīng)不像自己了”和“我已經(jīng)找回了自我”等等。斯巴拉解釋道，我們對(duì)自身的理解在很大程度上可能都與我們和伴侶的關(guān)系緊密相關(guān)，所以一旦分手，像“我是誰”、“我的朋友都有哪些”或者“我應(yīng)該如何打發(fā)時(shí)間”這樣的問題，就往往會(huì)變得難以回答。他解釋說，自述能幫助人們，因?yàn)椤八梢詭腿藗兲岣呙撾x于前情侶的自立感”。
That improved sense of self, in turn, led to reductions in loneliness and “emotional intrusion.” As for why the exercise worked, Dr. Sbarra has a few theories. “There is a degree of habituation that takes place as you are repeatedly thinking and talking about the process” of a breakup, he said. “You defang it a little bit.” And, he added, hearing yourself say something may prove revelatory. He imagines a subject’s internal monologue: “I didn’t know I seemed to be getting better until I said I seemed to be getting better. I must be getting better.”
這種經(jīng)過提高的自我意識(shí)，反過來又能減少孤獨(dú)感和“情緒入侵”。至于自述為什么會(huì)起作用，斯巴拉有幾個(gè)推測(cè)?！半S著你反復(fù)思考和談?wù)摲质诌^程，就會(huì)產(chǎn)生一定程度的習(xí)慣化，”他說?！斑@樣會(huì)削弱它的影響力?！彼€說，聽自己講述一些內(nèi)容，可能會(huì)具有啟發(fā)性。他想象研究對(duì)象的內(nèi)心獨(dú)白：“直到我說出自己似乎好些了，才知道我似乎真的已經(jīng)好些了。我一定要好起來?！?/div>
For people going through breakups without the benefit of psychology researchers to record their thoughts, Dr. Sbarra says the study offers some insights. Getting back your sense of self after a breakup, he argued, is crucial: “You really need to figure out a way to pull yourself back together and to try to get some reorganization in terms of who you are, what you do, how you spend your time.” You may not need a recording device to do that — Dr. Sbarra believes that you might also be able to rebuild your self-concept by writing, “in a stream-of-consciousness way, how you’re feeling about things.”
斯巴拉說，對(duì)于那些在分手后沒有心理學(xué)研究人員幫他們記錄想法的人，這項(xiàng)研究提供了一些啟發(fā)。他認(rèn)為，在分手后找回自我意識(shí)至關(guān)重要：“你真的需要找到一種找回自我的方式，試著對(duì)你是誰，你要做什么，你應(yīng)該如何打發(fā)時(shí)間等問題進(jìn)行重組?！弊龅竭@一點(diǎn)，你或許并不需要錄音設(shè)備——斯巴拉認(rèn)為你或許也能通過寫作來重塑自我概念，“以一種意識(shí)流的方式來書寫你對(duì)事物的感覺”。
OTHER researchers see benefits from self-reflective writing beyond soothing post-breakup pain — and the practice is drawing media attention, too. At the news website Mic, Rachel Grate cites research by a team from New Zealand showing that writing exercises may aid wound healing. She also quotes the psychologist James W. Pennebaker of the University of Texas at Austin: “When people are given the opportunity to write about emotional upheavals, they often experience improved health.”
還有一些研究人員發(fā)現(xiàn)，進(jìn)行反思式寫作除了可以緩解分手后的痛苦，還有其他好處，這種做法也獲得了媒體關(guān)注。在新聞網(wǎng)站Mic上，拉赫爾·格拉特(Rachel Grate)提到了一個(gè)新西蘭團(tuán)隊(duì)的研究項(xiàng)目，該研究說明寫作聯(lián)系可能有助于創(chuàng)傷修復(fù)。她還引用德克薩斯大學(xué)奧斯汀分校(University of Texas at Austin)心理學(xué)家詹姆斯·W·佩內(nèi)貝克(James W. Pennebaker)的話稱，“當(dāng)人們有機(jī)會(huì)記錄自己的情緒波動(dòng)時(shí)，他們的健康狀況通常會(huì)有所改善。”
According to James Hamblin at The Atlantic, a 2012 study found that writing improved quality of life for breast cancer patients. Laura I. Miller at the website Bustle offers 12 reasons we should all resolve to write more in 2015. And “if writing about the difficult parts of your life were a drug,” writes Drake Baer at Business Insider, “it would be making bank for some faceless pharmaceutical company.”
詹姆斯·漢布林(James Hamblin)在《大西洋月刊》(The Atlantic)雜志發(fā)表文章稱，2012年的一項(xiàng)研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，寫作的做法提高了乳腺癌患者的生活質(zhì)量。勞拉·I·米勒(Laura I. Miller)在Bustle網(wǎng)站撰文，列出了我們?cè)?015年應(yīng)該決心記錄更多的12個(gè)理由?！叭绻涗浬钪械钠D難時(shí)刻的做法是一種藥物，”德雷克·貝爾(Drake Baer)在商業(yè)內(nèi)幕(Business Insider)網(wǎng)站上寫道，“一些不知名的制藥公司就可以一夜暴富了?！?/div>
But if it were a drug, it might be one with a maximum recommended dosage — and warnings for certain patients. In another study, Dr. Sbarra found that divorced people assigned to do expressive writing exercises — essentially, exercises wherein they reflected on their feelings — showed no greater improvement in measures of emotional well-being than those asked to write, without emotion, about what they did during the day. And subjects who tended to ruminate on their situation actually did better if they were assigned to the emotion-free writing.
但如果這是一種藥物，它可能會(huì)設(shè)有最大推薦劑量——以及針對(duì)某些病人的警告。在另一項(xiàng)研究中，斯巴拉發(fā)現(xiàn)，與那些沒有情緒的、被要求記錄一天當(dāng)中的所作所為的人相比，被指派做表達(dá)性寫作練習(xí)的——基本上是記錄對(duì)自己的感覺的反思——離婚人士并沒有獲得更大程度的改善。當(dāng)那些傾向于反思自身情況的人被指派進(jìn)行無情緒寫作時(shí)，他們實(shí)際上做得更好。
The prompts in the expressive writing study were more involved than those in the speaking-exercise one — instead of responding to simple questions, participants were asked to “really delve into your deepest emotions and thoughts” or to “work toward creating a coherent story and narrative, with yourself as the storyteller.”
表達(dá)性寫作研究中的提示比自述研究的提示更為深入。它要求參與者“真正探索自己最深層的感受與想法”或“自己作為敘述者，努力創(chuàng)作一個(gè)連貫的故事”，而不僅限于回答簡(jiǎn)單的問題。
“I think the expressive writing intervention at times can be too heavy-handed,” said Dr. Sbarra. “It can be too directive without allowing people’s natural coping tendencies to do what they’ve done over the course of evolutionary history.” And for some people, reflecting too much on their feelings can make things worse. “That’s the real danger of our journaling culture,” he added — diary writing isn’t “one size fits all.”
“我覺得表達(dá)性寫作這種干預(yù)手段有時(shí)會(huì)力度過大，”斯巴拉說?！叭绻辉试S人采用自然的應(yīng)對(duì)機(jī)制，從事他們?cè)谘莼^程中發(fā)展出來的慣用做法，那么這種手段就會(huì)指令性過強(qiáng)。”對(duì)于一些人來說，過度反思自己的感受會(huì)讓情況變得更糟?！斑@是日記文化真正的危險(xiǎn)所在，”他還表示——寫日記的做法“并不適用于所有人”。
For many, the key may turn out to be some self-reflection, but not too much: writing about your feelings, “but then not necessarily mulling over it or doing any more. Just write it, talk about it, leave it, do it again.”
對(duì)于很多人而言，秘訣可能是一定程度上的自我反思，可是不要過多：記錄自己的感受，“但不一定要思前想后或做更多的事情。就把它記錄下來，聊一聊，然后遺忘，再來一遍”。
“There’s a really delicate balance between avoiding and getting overinvolved for every stressful event,” Dr. Sbarra explained, “and so you touch on it, you think about it, you put it out there, you reflect, and then you sort of create some distance.”
“實(shí)際上，對(duì)于每一個(gè)承受壓力的情境，在避免過分投入和過分投入之間存在微妙的平衡，”斯巴拉解釋稱，“你提到這種情緒，你去思考它，把事實(shí)擺在那兒，反思，然后就在某種程度上拉開了一些距離?！?/div>
So if you ever get a prescription for writing, it might read: Spend a little time with your diary — and then go for a walk.
因此，如果你得到了一張有關(guān)寫作的處方，它可能是這么寫的：花一點(diǎn)時(shí)間寫日記，然后出去走走。
| 重點(diǎn)單詞 | 查看全部解釋 | |||
| miller | ['milə] |
想一想再看 n. 磨坊主，銑床(工) |
||
| sample | ['sæmpl] |
想一想再看 n. 樣品，樣本 |
聯(lián)想記憶 | |
| response | [ri'spɔns] |
想一想再看 n. 回答，響應(yīng)，反應(yīng)，答復(fù) |
聯(lián)想記憶 | |
| device | [di'vais] |
想一想再看 n. 裝置，設(shè)計(jì)，策略，設(shè)備 |
||
| evolutionary | [.i:və'lu:ʃnəri] |
想一想再看 adj. 進(jìn)化的，發(fā)展的，演變的 |
||
| monologue | ['mɔnəlɔg] |
想一想再看 n. 獨(dú)白，長篇大論，獨(dú)角戲 |
聯(lián)想記憶 | |
| benefit | ['benifit] |
想一想再看 n. 利益，津貼，保險(xiǎn)金，義賣，義演 |
聯(lián)想記憶 | |
| certain | ['sə:tn] |
想一想再看 adj. 確定的，必然的，特定的 |
||
| questionnaire | [.kwestʃən'ɛ] |
想一想再看 n. 調(diào)查表 |
聯(lián)想記憶 | |
| drake | [dreik] |
想一想再看 n. 公鴨；蜉蝣類（等于drake fly） |
- 閱讀本文的人還閱讀了：
