评论
打印
Science and technology
科学技术
The psychology of morality
道德心理学
Time to be honest
时间让人诚实
A simple experiment suggests a way to encourage truthfulness
由简单实验总结出让人诚实的方法
IS SIN original?
难道人性本恶？
That is the question addressed by Shaul Shalvi, a psychologist at the University of Amsterdam, in a paper just published in Psychological Science.
阿姆斯特丹大学心理学家Shaul Shalvi在《心理科学》期刊上刚发表的一篇论文谈到了这个问题。
Dr Shalvi and his colleagues, Ori Eldar and Yoella Bereby-Meyer of Ben-Gurion University in Israel, wanted to know if the impulse to cheat is something that grows or diminishes when the potential cheater has time for reflection on his actions.
Shalvi博士和他的来自以色列Ben-Gurion大学的同事们 Ori Eldar 和 Yoella Bereby-Meye希望知道当一个想要撒谎的人如果有时间对他的行为思考时，他们说谎的动机是增加还是降低。
Is cheating, in other words, instinctive or calculating?
换句话说，撒谎，是一种应激本能还是经过慢慢算计的？
Appropriately, the researchers’ apparatus for their experiment was that icon of sinful activity, the gambling die.
研究人员为他们的实验提供了一个很合适的实验工具，赌博用的骰子—本身就象征着罪恶的活动。
They wanted to find out whether people were more likely to lie about the result of a die roll when asked that result immediately, or when given time to think.
他们想看看人们到底是在什么情况下更容易撒谎，是在需要立即报告骰子点数的情况下还是有足够的时间的情况下。
To carry out their experiment, Dr Shalvi, Dr Eldar and Dr Bereby-Meyer gave each of 76 volunteers a six-sided die and a cup.
为了进行实验，Ben-Gurion、 Ori Eldar 和 Yoella Bereby-Meye博士为76个志愿参与实验的人每人一个六面的骰子和一个杯子。
Participants were told that a number of them, chosen at random, would earn ten shekels for each pip of the numeral they rolled on the die.
他们告诉参与实验的人，他们随意摇出的骰子的点数，每一点可获得10谢克尔。
They were then instructed to shake their cups, check the outcome of the rolled die and remember this roll.
然后参与实验的人按照规定摇骰子，检查这一轮他们摇出的点数并且记住它。
Next, they were asked to roll the die two more times, to satisfy themselves that it was not loaded, and, that done, to enter the result of the first roll on a computer terminal.
他们按照要求再掷两次色子，好让他们自己相信没人对这色子动过手脚，这样检查完没问题之后，他们就把第一次掷出的数字输入到电脑终端中去。
Half of the participants were told to complete this procedure within 20 seconds while the others were given no time limit.
他要求一半的参与者在20s之内完成，而另一半则没有时间限制。
The researchers had no way of knowing what numbers participants actually rolled, of course.
当然研究人员无从知晓参与者摇出的真实数字。
But they knew, statistically, that the average roll, if people reported honestly, should have been 3.5.
但是从统计学理论上来讲，如果人们诚实的话，那么摇出的点数的平均数字应该是3.5，
This gave them a baseline from which to calculate participants’ honesty.
这个原理为他们提供了判断参与实验的人是否诚实的基线。
Those forced to enter their results within 20 seconds, the researchers found, reported a mean roll of 4.6.
那些被要求20秒内输入他们结果的人所报告的结果的平均数是4.6，
Those who were not under any time pressure reported a mean roll of 3.9.
而没有时间限制的人所报告的平均点数是3.9。所以，
Both groups lied, then. But those who had had more time for reflection lied less.
两个组的人都撒谎了，但有时间考虑的那一半人撒谎的少一些。
A second experiment confirmed this result.
第二个实验也证实了这个结果。
A different bunch of volunteers were asked to roll the die just once.
另一群志愿者只允许摇一次筛子，与
Again, half were put under time pressure and, since there were no additional rolls to make, the restriction was changed from 20 seconds to eight.
上次相同的是一半人必须在8秒内输入结果，而另一半则没有做时间限制，
The others were allowed to consider the matter for as long as they wished.
他们想思考多长时间都行。
In this case the first half reported an average roll of 4.4.
在这次试验中，前一半人输入的平均数字是4.4。
Those given no time limit reported an average of 3.4.
有充足时间思考的另一半人输入结果的平均数字是3.4.换句话说，
The second lot, in other words, actually told the truth.
这一半的人大部分都说了实话。
The conclusion, therefore, at least in the matter of cheating at dice, is that sin is indeed original.
因此，至少在骰子点数这个问题上，实验的结论是人生来的确是罪恶的。
Without time for reflection, people will default to the mode labelled cheat.
如果没有思考时间，人们会被预设为贴有欺骗标签的模式。
Given such time, however, they will often do the right thing.
然而如果给予充足的时间思考，他们通常会选择做正确的事情。
If you want someone to be honest, then, do not press him too hard for an immediate decision.
所以，如果你希望一个诚实，千万别为了一个立即的决定而给他太大压力。
