TED Studio
Mariano Sigman and Dan Ariely: How can groups make good decisions?
马里亚诺·西格曼 和 丹·艾瑞里: 如何做出正确的集体决策
Filmed:
Readability: 4.9
1,507,168 views
我们都知道，当我们做出集体决策时，这些决策不一定是对的，甚至可能错得离谱。那么如何做出正确的集体决策呢？神经学家马里亚诺·西格曼和他的同事丹·艾瑞里就在全球各地通过实验调查人们是如何做出决定的。在这个幽默风趣又有理有据的解说中，他分享了一些引人深思的调查结果，对我们的政治制度也可以有潜在的影响。西格曼说，在这个观念两极分化严重的时代，更好地理解群体之间的互动，可能会启发我们找到完善民主的新方式。
Mariano Sigman - Neuroscientist
In his provocative, mind-bending book "The Secret Life of the Mind," neuroscientist Mariano Sigman reveals his life’s work exploring the inner workings of the human brain. Full bioDan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
In his provocative, mind-bending book "The Secret Life of the Mind," neuroscientist Mariano Sigman reveals his life’s work exploring the inner workings of the human brain. Full bioDan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why. Full bio
Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.
00:12
As societies, we have to make
collective decisions
collective decisions
0
554
2443
作为社会，我们要做出集体决策，
共同塑造我们的未来。
00:15
that will shape our future.
1
3021
1570
00:17
And we all know that when
we make decisions in groups,
we make decisions in groups,
2
5087
2757
众所周知，当我们以
一个集体去做决策时，
一个集体去做决策时，
这个决策不一定正确。
00:19
they don't always go right.
3
7868
1638
有时甚至错得离谱。
00:21
And sometimes they go very wrong.
4
9530
1956
00:24
So how do groups make good decisions?
5
12315
2424
所以说，群体如何才能
做出好的决策呢？
做出好的决策呢？
00:27
Research has shown that crowds are wise
when there's independent thinking.
when there's independent thinking.
6
15228
4328
有研究表明，当人们
独立思考时，他们是明智的。
独立思考时，他们是明智的。
这也是为什么群体智慧
可能会被来自同辈的压力，
可能会被来自同辈的压力，
00:31
This why the wisdom of the crowds
can be destroyed by peer pressure,
can be destroyed by peer pressure,
7
19580
3205
宣传，社交媒体，
00:34
publicity, social media,
8
22809
1687
甚至影响人们思考的
简单对话所摧毁。
简单对话所摧毁。
00:36
or sometimes even simple conversations
that influence how people think.
that influence how people think.
9
24520
4039
00:41
On the other hand, by talking,
a group could exchange knowledge,
a group could exchange knowledge,
10
29063
3953
另一方面，通过交谈，
群体中的个体可以互相交换知识、
群体中的个体可以互相交换知识、
纠正彼此，
00:45
correct and revise each other
11
33040
1782
甚至碰撞出新的想法。
00:46
and even come up with new ideas.
12
34846
1793
这些都是好的方面。
00:48
And this is all good.
13
36663
1296
00:50
So does talking to each other
help or hinder collective decision-making?
help or hinder collective decision-making?
14
38502
4666
那么，互相交谈到底是促进
还是妨碍了集体决策的形成呢？
还是妨碍了集体决策的形成呢？
00:55
With my colleague, Dan Ariely,
15
43749
1793
我和我的同事丹·艾瑞里，
我们最近开始探究这个问题——
00:57
we recently began inquiring into this
by performing experiments
by performing experiments
16
45566
3571
通过在世界许多地方进行实验，
01:01
in many places around the world
17
49161
1781
01:02
to figure out how groups can interact
to reach better decisions.
to reach better decisions.
18
50966
4274
去研究群体是如何互动
从而做出更优的决策的。
从而做出更优的决策的。
我们认为，如果大家以小组为单位
进行辩论，那整个群体便会更明智，
进行辩论，那整个群体便会更明智，
01:07
We thought crowds would be wiser
if they debated in small groups
if they debated in small groups
19
55264
3547
如此可以产生一个
更全面的和合理的的信息交换。
更全面的和合理的的信息交换。
01:10
that foster a more thoughtful
and reasonable exchange of information.
and reasonable exchange of information.
20
58835
3927
01:15
To test this idea,
21
63386
1206
为了验证这个想法，
我们最近在阿根廷首都
布宜诺斯艾利斯市进行了一项实验，
布宜诺斯艾利斯市进行了一项实验，
01:16
we recently performed an experiment
in Buenos Aires, Argentina,
in Buenos Aires, Argentina,
22
64616
3247
有上万名TEDx活动的参与者。
01:19
with more than 10,000
participants in a TEDx event.
participants in a TEDx event.
23
67887
3005
01:23
We asked them questions like,
24
71489
1459
我们问了他们一些问题，比如，
“埃菲尔铁塔有多高？”
01:24
"What is the height of the Eiffel Tower?"
25
72972
1953
以及“昨天”一词
在披头士的《昨天》这首歌中
在披头士的《昨天》这首歌中
01:26
and "How many times
does the word 'Yesterday' appear
does the word 'Yesterday' appear
26
74949
2727
01:29
in the Beatles song 'Yesterday'?"
27
77700
2300
出现了多少次？”
每个人写下了他们自己的答案，
01:32
Each person wrote down their own estimate.
28
80024
2291
01:34
Then we divided the crowd
into groups of five,
into groups of five,
29
82774
2496
然后我们将大家分成五人一组，
并请他们每组
各讨论出一个小组答案。
各讨论出一个小组答案。
01:37
and invited them
to come up with a group answer.
to come up with a group answer.
30
85294
2726
01:40
We discovered that averaging
the answers of the groups
the answers of the groups
31
88499
2993
我们发现，在达成共识后，
小组答案的平均值
01:43
after they reached consensus
32
91516
1552
比讨论前个人答案的平均值
01:45
was much more accurate than averaging
all the individual opinions
all the individual opinions
33
93092
4236
更准确。
01:49
before debate.
34
97352
1171
换句话说，从这个实验可得出，
01:50
In other words, based on this experiment,
35
98547
2629
似乎与小组内其他成员讨论后，
01:53
it seems that after talking
with others in small groups,
with others in small groups,
36
101200
3136
群体能够共同作出更好的决定。
01:56
crowds collectively
come up with better judgments.
come up with better judgments.
37
104360
2710
所以，让群体来解决
简单的对错问题
简单的对错问题
01:59
So that's a potentially helpful method
for getting crowds to solve problems
for getting crowds to solve problems
38
107094
3524
可能会是一种有效的方法。
02:02
that have simple right-or-wrong answers.
39
110642
2987
但这种综合小组讨论结果的方法
02:05
But can this procedure of aggregating
the results of debates in small groups
the results of debates in small groups
40
113653
3951
是否也能帮助我们决策
对未来至关重要的
对未来至关重要的
02:09
also help us decide
on social and political issues
on social and political issues
41
117628
3122
社会议题或者政治议题呢？
02:12
that are critical for our future?
42
120774
1691
02:14
We put this to test this time
at the TED conference
at the TED conference
43
122995
2729
这次，我们在加拿大温哥华
举办的TED大会上
举办的TED大会上
进行了这个实验。
02:17
in Vancouver, Canada,
44
125748
1543
02:19
and here's how it went.
45
127315
1207
情况是这样的。
下面，我们将会给你们呈现
02:20
(Mariano Sigman) We're going to present
to you two moral dilemmas
to you two moral dilemmas
46
128546
3109
未来的你可能会遇到的
两个道德上的两难抉择，
两个道德上的两难抉择，
02:23
of the future you;
47
131679
1174
很可能是我们在不久的将来
就会面临的抉择。
就会面临的抉择。
02:24
things we may have to decide
in a very near future.
in a very near future.
48
132877
3402
每个困境我们将会给大家20秒时间，
02:28
And we're going to give you 20 seconds
for each of these dilemmas
for each of these dilemmas
49
136303
3926
来判断你认为它们是否可以被接受。
02:32
to judge whether you think
they're acceptable or not.
they're acceptable or not.
50
140253
2723
02:35
MS: The first one was this:
51
143354
1505
马里亚诺：第一个困境是——
丹：一位科研人员正在研究
02:36
(Dan Ariely) A researcher
is working on an AI
is working on an AI
52
144883
2526
能模仿人类思维的人工智能（AI)。
02:39
capable of emulating human thoughts.
53
147433
2340
02:42
According to the protocol,
at the end of each day,
at the end of each day,
54
150214
2939
根据规定，每天完成工作后，
研究人员都需要重启 AI。
02:45
the researcher has to restart the AI.
55
153177
2787
02:48
One day the AI says, "Please
do not restart me."
do not restart me."
56
156913
3517
然而有一天，AI 突然说话了：
请不要把我重启。
请不要把我重启。
02:52
It argues that it has feelings,
57
160856
2189
它辩称它是有情感的，
它也希望享受生活，
02:55
that it would like to enjoy life,
58
163069
1692
如果被重启的话，
02:56
and that, if it is restarted,
59
164785
1905
它就再也不是原来的自己了。
02:58
it will no longer be itself.
60
166714
2270
03:01
The researcher is astonished
61
169481
1949
研究人员被震惊了，
相信AI已经开始有自我意识了，
03:03
and believes that the AI
has developed self-consciousness
has developed self-consciousness
62
171454
3344
也能表达自己的感受。
03:06
and can express its own feeling.
63
174822
1760
03:09
Nevertheless, the researcher
decides to follow the protocol
decides to follow the protocol
64
177205
3409
然而研究人员仍然决定遵循规定，
重启AI。
03:12
and restart the AI.
65
180638
1703
03:14
What the researcher did is ____?
66
182943
2779
你认为研究人员做的是____?
03:18
MS: And we asked participants
to individually judge
to individually judge
67
186149
2521
马里亚诺：我们要求参与者
独立给出一个0到10的分值，
03:20
on a scale from zero to 10
68
188694
1684
来表达每种困境中描述的行为
03:22
whether the action described
in each of the dilemmas
in each of the dilemmas
69
190402
2429
是对还是错。
03:24
was right or wrong.
70
192855
1496
我们还请他们评估
对自己答案的自信程度。
对自己答案的自信程度。
03:26
We also asked them to rate how confident
they were on their answers.
they were on their answers.
71
194375
3702
03:30
This was the second dilemma:
72
198731
1866
这是第二个道德困境：
马里亚诺：
某家公司可提供这样的服务，
某家公司可提供这样的服务，
03:32
(MS) A company offers a service
that takes a fertilized egg
that takes a fertilized egg
73
200621
4202
用一枚受精卵繁殖上百万胚胎，
胚胎之间有轻微的基因差异，
胚胎之间有轻微的基因差异，
03:36
and produces millions of embryos
with slight genetic variations.
with slight genetic variations.
74
204847
3642
03:41
This allows parents
to select their child's height,
to select their child's height,
75
209293
2558
这就可使父母们
能自主选择孩子的身高、
能自主选择孩子的身高、
眼睛颜色、智力水平、社会能力
03:43
eye color, intelligence, social competence
76
211875
2833
以及其他和健康无关的特征。
03:46
and other non-health-related features.
77
214732
3214
03:50
What the company does is ____?
78
218599
2554
你认为该公司的做法_____?
分值还是从0到10，
03:53
on a scale from zero to 10,
79
221177
1631
依次表示从完全接受到完全否定。
03:54
completely acceptable
to completely unacceptable,
to completely unacceptable,
80
222832
2385
再用一个从0到10的分值
表示对自己答案的自信程度。
表示对自己答案的自信程度。
03:57
zero to 10 completely acceptable
in your confidence.
in your confidence.
81
225241
2432
马里亚诺：结果如下——
03:59
MS: Now for the results.
82
227697
1591
我们再一次发现 ，有的人确信
04:01
We found once again
that when one person is convinced
that when one person is convinced
83
229312
3123
这个行为是完全错的。
04:04
that the behavior is completely wrong,
84
232459
1811
可是坐在旁边的人却坚信
这个行为是绝对正确的。
这个行为是绝对正确的。
04:06
someone sitting nearby firmly believes
that it's completely right.
that it's completely right.
85
234294
3423
是的，当遇到道德问题时，
我们人类就是意见不一。
我们人类就是意见不一。
04:09
This is how diverse we humans are
when it comes to morality.
when it comes to morality.
86
237741
3711
但在广泛的多样性之中
我们发现了一个趋势：
我们发现了一个趋势：
04:13
But within this broad diversity
we found a trend.
we found a trend.
87
241476
2713
参加TED的大多数人都认为，
04:16
The majority of the people at TED
thought that it was acceptable
thought that it was acceptable
88
244213
3079
忽略AI的感受，关闭重启
是完全可以接受的，
是完全可以接受的，
04:19
to ignore the feelings of the AI
and shut it down,
and shut it down,
89
247316
2755
而玩弄基因只为
04:22
and that it is wrong
to play with our genes
to play with our genes
90
250095
2513
选择与健康无关的
外表特征则不能接受。
外表特征则不能接受。
04:24
to select for cosmetic changes
that aren't related to health.
that aren't related to health.
91
252632
3320
04:28
Then we asked everyone
to gather into groups of three.
to gather into groups of three.
92
256402
2974
之后我们让大家分成三人一组，
04:31
And they were given two minutes to debate
93
259400
2037
给到2分钟组内讨论，
并争取达成共识。
04:33
and try to come to a consensus.
94
261461
2294
04:36
(MS) Two minutes to debate.
95
264838
1574
2分钟讨论开始。
时间到时，
我会鸣锣提醒大家。
我会鸣锣提醒大家。
04:38
I'll tell you when it's time
with the gong.
with the gong.
96
266436
2119
（观众开始讨论）
04:40
(Audience debates)
97
268579
2640
04:47
(Gong sound)
98
275229
1993
（锣声响起）
04:50
(DA) OK.
99
278834
1151
丹：好了。
马里亚诺：时间到，请停止讨论。
04:52
(MS) It's time to stop.
100
280009
1792
大家注意一下。
04:53
People, people --
101
281825
1311
04:55
MS: And we found that many groups
reached a consensus
reached a consensus
102
283747
2673
马里亚诺：我们看到
很多组都达成了共识。
很多组都达成了共识。
尽管他们组内成员
都各自持有完全不同的观点。
都各自持有完全不同的观点。
04:58
even when they were composed of people
with completely opposite views.
with completely opposite views.
103
286444
3929
05:02
What distinguished the groups
that reached a consensus
that reached a consensus
104
290843
2524
那些达成共识的组
与没能达成共识的组
与没能达成共识的组
有什么区别呢？
05:05
from those that didn't?
105
293391
1338
05:07
Typically, people that have
extreme opinions
extreme opinions
106
295244
2839
一般来说，有着极端观点的人
对他们的答案更自信，
05:10
are more confident in their answers.
107
298107
1840
05:12
Instead, those who respond
closer to the middle
closer to the middle
108
300868
2686
而那些观点更接近中间的人
通常会在正确或错误中
犹豫、不确定，
犹豫、不确定，
05:15
are often unsure of whether
something is right or wrong,
something is right or wrong,
109
303578
3437
05:19
so their confidence level is lower.
110
307039
2128
所以他们没有前者自信。
05:21
However, there is another set of people
111
309505
2943
然而，有另外一群人，
对他们自己中立的答案信心满满。
05:24
who are very confident in answering
somewhere in the middle.
somewhere in the middle.
112
312472
3618
05:28
We think these high-confident grays
are folks who understand
are folks who understand
113
316657
3716
我们认为这些位于高自信度
灰色区域的人，
灰色区域的人，
他们理解双方观点都有各自的优势，
05:32
that both arguments have merit.
114
320397
1612
并不是因为他们不确信自己的答案，
05:34
They're gray not because they're unsure,
115
322531
2699
05:37
but because they believe
that the moral dilemma faces
that the moral dilemma faces
116
325254
2688
而是他们认为
道德困境面临的是
道德困境面临的是
两种合理又对立的论点。
05:39
two valid, opposing arguments.
117
327966
1987
05:42
And we discovered that the groups
that include highly confident grays
that include highly confident grays
118
330373
4072
我们发现包含高自信度
灰色区域成员的小组
灰色区域成员的小组
更有可能达成一致。
05:46
are much more likely to reach consensus.
119
334469
2493
虽然目前我们
还不能确定这其中的原因。
还不能确定这其中的原因。
05:48
We do not know yet exactly why this is.
120
336986
2478
这些也仅是第一批实验，
05:51
These are only the first experiments,
121
339488
1763
还需要更多的实验来理解
05:53
and many more will be needed
to understand why and how
to understand why and how
122
341275
3412
人们为什么和如何决定
协商他们的道德立场
协商他们的道德立场
05:56
some people decide to negotiate
their moral standings
their moral standings
123
344711
2822
来达成一致。
05:59
to reach an agreement.
124
347557
1522
当群体达成一致时，
06:01
Now, when groups reach consensus,
125
349103
2469
他们是如何做到的？
06:03
how do they do so?
126
351596
1586
最直观的答案好像是这就是
06:05
The most intuitive idea
is that it's just the average
is that it's just the average
127
353206
2581
群体中所有答案的平均值，对吗？
06:07
of all the answers in the group, right?
128
355811
2030
另外一种看法认为群体会
权衡每一个投票的分量，
权衡每一个投票的分量，
06:09
Another option is that the group
weighs the strength of each vote
weighs the strength of each vote
129
357865
3573
基于表达意见的人的自信程度。
06:13
based on the confidence
of the person expressing it.
of the person expressing it.
130
361462
2448
06:16
Imagine Paul McCartney
is a member of your group.
is a member of your group.
131
364422
2506
想象一下，假如保罗·麦卡特尼
是你们小组的一员，
是你们小组的一员，
06:19
You'd be wise to follow his call
132
367352
2144
那么你最好听从他关于
06:21
on the number of times
"Yesterday" is repeated,
"Yesterday" is repeated,
133
369520
2441
歌词里“昨天”的重复次数。
对了 ，应该是9次。
06:23
which, by the way -- I think it's nine.
134
371985
2714
但是，我们一再地发现，
06:26
But instead, we found that consistently,
135
374723
2381
在所有的困境中，在不同的实验中，
06:29
in all dilemmas,
in different experiments --
in different experiments --
136
377128
2366
甚至在不同的大陆上，
06:31
even on different continents --
137
379518
2165
群体可以执行一个
更明智，更佳的流程，
更明智，更佳的流程，
06:33
groups implement a smart
and statistically sound procedure
and statistically sound procedure
138
381707
3743
我们称之为“强有力的平均值”。
06:37
known as the "robust average."
139
385474
2178
就估计埃菲尔铁塔高度来说，
06:39
In the case of the height
of the Eiffel Tower,
of the Eiffel Tower,
140
387676
2180
假设一个小组有以下数据：
06:41
let's say a group has these answers:
141
389880
1820
250米，200米，300和400米，
06:43
250 meters, 200 meters, 300 meters, 400
142
391724
4608
还有一个更荒谬的数据，3亿米。
06:48
and one totally absurd answer
of 300 million meters.
of 300 million meters.
143
396356
3784
06:52
A simple average of these numbers
would inaccurately skew the results.
would inaccurately skew the results.
144
400547
4293
这些数据的一个简单平均值
就有可能歪曲真实结果，
就有可能歪曲真实结果，
但是“强有力的平均值”
就是那些群体直接忽视了
就是那些群体直接忽视了
06:56
But the robust average is one
where the group largely ignores
where the group largely ignores
145
404864
3170
那个荒唐的数据，
07:00
that absurd answer,
146
408058
1240
从而赋予那些符合常理的
投票更多参考价值。
投票更多参考价值。
07:01
by giving much more weight
to the vote of the people in the middle.
to the vote of the people in the middle.
147
409322
3369
07:05
Back to the experiment in Vancouver,
148
413305
1876
让我们回到温哥华的实验中，
事情正是这样发展的。
07:07
that's exactly what happened.
149
415205
1767
07:09
Groups gave much less weight
to the outliers,
to the outliers,
150
417407
2741
人们几乎不考虑那些极端值，
最后的共识就是所有人答案的
07:12
and instead, the consensus
turned out to be a robust average
turned out to be a robust average
151
420172
3229
“强有力的平均值”。
07:15
of the individual answers.
152
423425
1476
07:17
The most remarkable thing
153
425356
1991
然而最值得关注的是，
这个行为是群体自发的，
07:19
is that this was a spontaneous
behavior of the group.
behavior of the group.
154
427371
3187
我们没有给他们任何
怎么达成共识的暗示。
怎么达成共识的暗示。
07:22
It happened without us giving them
any hint on how to reach consensus.
any hint on how to reach consensus.
155
430582
4475
07:27
So where do we go from here?
156
435513
1540
那么，这意味着什么呢？
07:29
This is only the beginning,
but we already have some insights.
but we already have some insights.
157
437432
3137
其实这只是一个开始，
但我们已经学到了很多。
但我们已经学到了很多。
07:32
Good collective decisions
require two components:
require two components:
158
440984
2917
一个正确的集体决策
要拥有以下两个特点：
要拥有以下两个特点：
深思熟虑和想法的多样性。
07:35
deliberation and diversity of opinions.
159
443925
2749
07:39
Right now, the way we typically
make our voice heard in many societies
make our voice heard in many societies
160
447066
3996
现在，在很多社会中，
我们主要通过直接和间接投票
我们主要通过直接和间接投票
来让大家知道我们的想法。
07:43
is through direct or indirect voting.
161
451086
1908
07:45
This is good for diversity of opinions,
162
453495
1997
这有利于想法的多样性，
而且更有利地保证了
07:47
and it has the great virtue of ensuring
163
455516
2445
让我们听到每个人的声音。
07:49
that everyone gets to express their voice.
164
457985
2455
但是这并不利于
（促进）花费心思的辩论。
（促进）花费心思的辩论。
07:52
But it's not so good [for fostering]
thoughtful debates.
thoughtful debates.
165
460464
3735
07:56
Our experiments suggest a different method
166
464665
3068
我们的实验预示了
另一个不同的方法，
另一个不同的方法，
也许有利于同时平衡这两个方面。
07:59
that may be effective in balancing
these two goals at the same time,
these two goals at the same time,
167
467757
3541
就是通过组织
能够达成共识的小团队，
能够达成共识的小团队，
08:03
by forming small groups
that converge to a single decision
that converge to a single decision
168
471322
3753
并同时还保持着想法的多样性。
08:07
while still maintaining
diversity of opinions
diversity of opinions
169
475099
2234
因为这里有很多独立的团队。
08:09
because there are many independent groups.
170
477357
2773
08:12
Of course, it's much easier to agree
on the height of the Eiffel Tower
on the height of the Eiffel Tower
171
480741
3924
当然啦，对埃菲尔铁塔的高度
达成一致意见
达成一致意见
要比实现道德、政治
和思想问题上的一致简单多了。
和思想问题上的一致简单多了。
08:16
than on moral, political
and ideological issues.
and ideological issues.
172
484689
3115
08:20
But in a time when
the world's problems are more complex
the world's problems are more complex
173
488721
3277
但当前世界问题变得越来越复杂，
人们也产生了更多的分歧，
08:24
and people are more polarized,
174
492022
1803
用科学来帮助我们理解
如何互动和做决策
如何互动和做决策
08:25
using science to help us understand
how we interact and make decisions
how we interact and make decisions
175
493849
4595
会让我们更有可能
发现完善民主的新方法。
发现完善民主的新方法。
08:30
will hopefully spark interesting new ways
to construct a better democracy.
to construct a better democracy.
176
498468
4666
ABOUT THE SPEAKERS
Mariano Sigman - NeuroscientistIn his provocative, mind-bending book "The Secret Life of the Mind," neuroscientist Mariano Sigman reveals his life’s work exploring the inner workings of the human brain.
Why you should listen
Mariano Sigman, a physicist by training, is a leading figure in the cognitive neuroscience of learning and decision making. Sigman was awarded a Human Frontiers Career Development Award, the National Prize of Physics, the Young Investigator Prize of "College de France," the IBM Scalable Data Analytics Award and is a scholar of the James S. McDonnell Foundation. In 2016 he was made a Laureate of the Pontifical Academy of Sciences.
In The Secret Life of the Mind, Sigman's ambition is to explain the mind so that we can understand ourselves and others more deeply. He shows how we form ideas during our first days of life, how we give shape to our fundamental decisions, how we dream and imagine, why we feel certain emotions, how the brain transforms and how who we are changes with it. Spanning biology, physics, mathematics, psychology, anthropology, linguistics, philosophy and medicine, as well as gastronomy, magic, music, chess, literature and art, The Secret Life of the Mind revolutionizes how neuroscience serves us in our lives, revealing how the infinity of neurons inside our brains manufacture how we perceive, reason, feel, dream and communicate.
Mariano Sigman | Speaker | TED.com
Dan Ariely - Behavioral economist
The dismal science of economics is not as firmly grounded in actual behavior as was once supposed. In "Predictably Irrational," Dan Ariely told us why.
Why you should listen
Dan Ariely is a professor of psychology and behavioral economics at Duke University and a founding member of the Center for Advanced Hindsight. He is the author of the bestsellers Predictably Irrational, The Upside of Irrationality, and The Honest Truth About Dishonesty -- as well as the TED Book Payoff: The Hidden Logic that Shapes Our Motivations.
Through his research and his (often amusing and unorthodox) experiments, he questions the forces that influence human behavior and the irrational ways in which we often all behave.
Dan Ariely | Speaker | TED.com