評論
打印
Now listen to part of a lecture on this topic in a psychology class.
現(xiàn)在請聽心理學(xué)課上關(guān)于這個(gè)話題的部分內(nèi)容。
For example, I recently read about a case, in which a researcher was given two groups of monkeys,
舉個(gè)例子，我最近讀到了一個(gè)案例，在這個(gè)案例中，有人給了研究員兩群猴子，
and he was asked to train these monkeys to pick up a ball and put it in a box,
讓他訓(xùn)練這些猴子把球撿起來并放到箱子里去，
and he was told to record how many hours it took to train each monkey to learn to do this.
研究員被要求記錄下來，他訓(xùn)練每只猴子做到這些所花的時(shí)間。
Now, before he started the training,
在開始這項(xiàng)訓(xùn)練之前，
the researcher was told that one group of monkeys was highly intelligent and the other group was less intelligent.
研究員被告知其中一群猴子智商很高，而另一群猴子則智商較低。
In truth, there was no difference between them.
但是事實(shí)上，這兩群猴子并沒有什么區(qū)別。
All the monkeys were actually very similar in terms of intelligence.
所有猴子的智商水平實(shí)際上都十分相近。
But the researcher didn't know that.
可是研究員并不知情。
He thought one group was smarter, so he expected that, that group would be easier to train.
他以為其中一群猴子比較聰明，所以他預(yù)想的是，那群聰明的猴子會(huì)學(xué)得比較快。
So, what happened?
那么，情況如何呢？
Well, the researcher trained the monkeys to perform the action, and it turned out that,
研究員教會(huì)了這些猴子做那些事情，而且結(jié)果顯示，
on average, it took him two hours less time to train the supposedly smart monkeys than the supposedly less intelligent monkeys.
他教會(huì)這群按理來說聰明些的猴子所花的時(shí)間，平均比教會(huì)那群所謂智商較低的猴子所花的時(shí)間要少兩個(gè)小時(shí)。
Why? Well, it turns out that with the supposedly smart monkeys the researcher smiled at them a lot,
為什么呢？原來研究員對這群他以為要聰明些的猴子笑得多些，
gave them a lot of encouragement, talked to them a lot, worked hard to communicate with them.
給了它們很多鼓勵(lì)，經(jīng)常對它們講話，并且很努力地跟它們進(jìn)行溝通。
But with the monkeys he thought were less intelligent,
但是對那群他以為智商較低的猴子，
he wasn't this enthusiastic, he didn't try this hard, wasn't quite optimistic.
就沒有那么熱情了，訓(xùn)練的時(shí)候也沒有很上心，對它們也沒有多么積極。
