ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Petter Johansson - Experimental psychologist
Petter Johansson and his research group study self-knowledge and attitude change using methods ranging from questionnaires to close-up card magic.

Why you should listen

Petter Johansson is an associate professor in cognitive science, and together with Lars Hall he runs the Choice Blindness Lab at Lund University in Sweden. 
 
The main theme of Johansson's research is self-knowledge: How much do we know about ourselves, and how do we come to acquire this knowledge? To study these questions, he and his collaborators have developed an experimental paradigm known as "choice blindness." The methodological twist in these experiments is to use magic tricks to manipulate the outcome of people's choices -- and then measure to what extent and in what ways people react to these changes. The general finding is that participants often fail to detect when they receive the opposite of their choice, and when asked to explain, they readily construct and confabulate answers motivating a choice they only believe they intended to make. The effect has been demonstrated in choice experiments on topics such as facial attractiveness, consumer choice and moral and political decision making.

More profile about the speaker
Petter Johansson | Speaker | TED.com
TEDxUppsalaUniversity

Petter Johansson: Do you really know why you do what you do?

佩特強納森: 你真的知道你所做所為背後的理由嗎?

Filmed:
1,423,138 views

實驗心理學家佩特強納森研究「選擇的盲目」──這種現象就是我們會說服自己,我們得到了想要的,即使實際上並沒有。在這場讓人開眼界的演說中,他分享了一些(和魔術師一起設計的)實驗結果,目的是要回答:我們所做所為背後的理由是什麼?研究的發現對於自我知識的本質,以及我們對操控的反應有很重大的意涵。我們未必有自己想像的那麼了解自己。
- Experimental psychologist
Petter Johansson and his research group study self-knowledge and attitude change using methods ranging from questionnaires to close-up card magic. Full bio

Double-click the English transcript below to play the video.

00:12
So why do you think
the rich豐富 should pay工資 more in taxes?
0
800
3560
為什麼你會認為
有錢人應該繳比較多稅?
00:16
Why did you buy購買 the latest最新 iPhone蘋果手機?
1
4400
2376
為什麼你要買最新出的 iPhone?
00:18
Why did you pick your current當前 partner夥伴?
2
6800
2456
為什麼你會選上你現在的伴侶?
00:21
And why did so many許多 people
vote投票 for Donald唐納德 Trump王牌?
3
9280
3416
為什麼有那麼多人投給川普?
00:24
What were the reasons原因, why did they do it?
4
12720
2520
理由是什麼?為什麼他們會這樣做?
00:27
So we ask this kind
of question all the time,
5
15990
2106
我們總是在問這類的問題,
00:30
and we expect期望 to get an answer回答.
6
18120
1736
且我們期望能得到答案。
00:31
And when being存在 asked,
we expect期望 ourselves我們自己 to know the answer回答,
7
19880
3136
當被問的時候,我們也
期望我們自己知道答案,
00:35
to simply只是 tell why we did as we did.
8
23040
2480
很簡單地說出我們
所做所為背後的理由。
00:38
But do we really know why?
9
26440
1720
但我們真的知道為什麼嗎?
00:41
So when you say that you prefer比較喜歡
George喬治 Clooney克魯尼 to Tom湯姆 Hanks漢克斯,
10
29000
3456
所以,當你說,你喜歡
喬治克隆尼多於湯姆漢克,
00:44
due應有 to his concern關心 for the environment環境,
11
32479
2057
是因為他對環境比較關心,
00:46
is that really true真正?
12
34560
1200
真的是這樣嗎?
00:48
So you can be perfectly完美 sincere真誠
and genuinely真正的 believe
13
36560
2496
這麼一來,你就可以
非常真誠且真正相信
00:51
that this is the reason原因
that drives驅動器 your choice選擇,
14
39080
2936
這就是驅使你做出
這個選擇的背後理由,
00:54
but to me, it may可能 still feel
like something is missing失踪.
15
42040
2600
但對我而言,還是覺得少了什麼。
00:57
As it stands站立, due應有 to
the nature性質 of subjectivity主觀性,
16
45560
3176
在目前的條件下,
因為主觀性的本質,
01:00
it is actually其實 very hard to ever prove證明
that people are wrong錯誤 about themselves他們自己.
17
48760
4320
其實非常難去證明人們
對自己的看法是錯的。
01:06
So I'm an experimental試驗 psychologist心理學家,
18
54600
2136
我是一名實驗心理學家,
01:08
and this is the problem問題
we've我們已經 been trying to solve解決 in our lab實驗室.
19
56760
3536
這是我們在實驗室中
一直想解決的問題。
01:12
So we wanted to create創建 an experiment實驗
20
60320
2176
我們想要創造出一種實驗,
01:14
that would allow允許 us to challenge挑戰
what people say about themselves他們自己,
21
62520
3536
讓我們來挑戰人們對自己的說詞,
01:18
regardless而不管 of how certain某些 they may可能 seem似乎.
22
66080
2680
不論他們看起來有多肯定。
01:21
But tricking淋水 people
about their own擁有 mind心神 is hard.
23
69960
2736
但要欺騙一個人關於
他自己大腦的事,是很困難的。
01:24
So we turned轉身 to the professionals專業人士.
24
72720
2376
所以我們轉向專業人士求助。
01:27
The magicians魔術師.
25
75120
1200
魔術師。
01:29
So they're experts專家 at creating創建
the illusion錯覺 of a free自由 choice選擇.
26
77120
2896
他們的專業就是創造出
有自由選擇權的幻覺。
01:32
So when they say, "Pick a card, any card,"
27
80040
2296
當他們說:「挑一張牌,
任何一張牌。」
01:34
the only thing you know
is that your choice選擇 is no longer free自由.
28
82360
2920
你唯一能知道的就是,
你的選擇已不是自由的。
01:38
So we had a few少數 fantastic奇妙
brainstorming頭腦風暴 sessions會議
29
86200
2376
我們和一群瑞典的魔術師進行了
01:40
with a group of Swedish瑞典 magicians魔術師,
30
88600
1856
幾次很棒的腦力激盪,
01:42
and they helped幫助 us create創建 a method方法
31
90480
1642
他們協助我們創造了
01:44
in which哪一個 we would be able能夠 to manipulate操作
the outcome結果 of people's人們 choices選擇.
32
92147
3973
一種方式,讓我們能
操控別人的選擇結果。
這樣,當人們對自己的看法
有誤時,我們就會知道,
01:48
This way we would know
when people are wrong錯誤 about themselves他們自己,
33
96760
2936
01:51
even if they don't know this themselves他們自己.
34
99720
2040
即使他們自己都不知道。
01:54
So I will now show顯示 you
a short movie電影 showing展示 this manipulation操作.
35
102480
4656
我現在要播放一段影片,
說明這種操控要如何進行。
01:59
So it's quite相當 simple簡單.
36
107160
1416
它相當簡單。
02:00
The participants參與者 make a choice選擇,
37
108600
2136
受試者要做一個選擇,
02:02
but I end結束 up giving them the opposite對面.
38
110760
2256
但我卻會給他們沒有選的那一個。
02:05
And then we want to see:
How did they react應對, and what did they say?
39
113040
3520
接著,我們想看看:
他們會如何反應、會說什麼?
02:09
So it's quite相當 simple簡單, but see
if you can spot the magic魔法 going on.
40
117240
3160
所以它很簡單,但試試
你能否看到有魔術在發生。
02:13
And this was shot射擊 with real真實 participants參與者,
they don't know what's going on.
41
121440
3520
這是在拍攝真實的受試者,
他們不知道會發生什麼事。
02:19
(Video視頻) Petter彼得 Johansson約翰森:
Hi你好, my name's名字的 Petter彼得.
42
127000
2216
(影片)佩特強納森:
嗨,我是佩特。
02:21
Woman女人: Hi你好, I'm BeckaBecka.
43
129240
1215
女子:嗨,我是貝卡。
02:22
PJPJ: I'm going to show顯示 you
pictures圖片 like this.
44
130479
2137
佩特:我會給你看像這樣的照片。
02:24
And you'll你會 have to decide決定
which哪一個 one you find more attractive有吸引力.
45
132640
2896
你得要決定,你覺得
哪一張比較吸引人。
02:27
BeckaBecka: OK.
46
135560
1216
貝卡:好。
02:28
PJPJ: And then sometimes有時,
I will ask you why you prefer比較喜歡 that face面對.
47
136800
3176
佩特:有時,我會問你,
你為什麼偏好那張臉。
02:32
BeckaBecka: OK.
48
140000
1216
貝卡:好。
02:33
PJPJ: Ready準備?
BeckaBecka: Yeah.
49
141240
1200
佩特:準備好了?
貝卡:好了。
02:43
PJPJ: Why did you prefer比較喜歡 that one?
50
151120
1816
佩特:你為什麼比較喜歡那張臉?
02:44
BeckaBecka: The smile微笑, I think.
51
152960
1496
貝卡:我想,是微笑。
02:46
PJPJ: Smile微笑.
52
154480
1200
佩特:微笑。
02:52
Man: One on the left.
53
160400
1240
男子:左邊的。
02:57
Again, this one just struck來襲 me.
54
165520
1640
一樣,這張照片有觸到我的點。
02:59
Interesting有趣 shot射擊.
55
167760
1616
有趣的拍攝鏡頭。
03:01
Since以來 I'm a photographer攝影師,
I like the way it's lit發光的 and looks容貌.
56
169400
3000
我是個攝影師,我喜歡它
打燈和看起來的感覺。
03:06
Petter彼得 Johansson約翰森: But now comes the trick.
57
174280
2040
佩特:但,現在來看一下騙局。
03:10
(Video視頻) Woman女人 1: This one.
58
178120
1280
(影片)女子 1:這張。
03:16
PJPJ: So they get the opposite對面
of their choice選擇.
59
184240
2280
佩特:他們拿到的照片
是他們沒選的那張。
03:20
And let's see what happens發生.
60
188520
1600
咱們來瞧瞧會發生什麼事。
03:28
Woman女人 2: Um ...
61
196240
1200
女子 2:呃…
03:35
I think he seems似乎 a little more
innocent無辜 than the other guy.
62
203760
2800
我覺得他看起來比另一個人無辜些。
03:45
Man: The one on the left.
63
213360
1240
男子:左邊的。
03:49
I like her smile微笑
and contour輪廓 of the nose鼻子 and face面對.
64
217280
3696
我喜歡她的微笑,
還有鼻子和臉頰的輪廓。
03:53
So it's a little more interesting有趣
to me, and her haircut理髮.
65
221000
2760
所以我覺得這張比較有趣,
還有她的髮型。
04:00
Woman女人 3: This one.
66
228040
1200
女子 3:這張。
04:03
I like the smirkysmirky look better.
67
231520
1576
我比較喜歡嘻嘻笑的外表。
04:05
PJPJ: You like the smirkysmirky look better?
68
233120
2000
佩特:你比較喜歡嘻嘻笑的外表?
04:09
(Laughter笑聲)
69
237680
3176
(笑聲)
04:12
Woman女人 3: This one.
70
240880
1200
女子 3:這張。
04:15
PJPJ: What made製作 you choose選擇 him?
71
243280
1400
佩特:你為什麼選他?
04:17
Woman女人 3: I don't know,
he looks容貌 a little bit like the Hobbit哈比 人.
72
245520
2896
女子 3:我不知道,
他看起來有點像哈比人。
04:20
(Laughter笑聲)
73
248440
2056
(笑聲)
04:22
PJPJ: And what happens發生 in the end結束
74
250520
1496
佩特:在實驗結束時,
04:24
when I tell them the true真正 nature性質
of the experiment實驗?
75
252040
3096
當我告訴他們這個實驗
真正在做什麼,會如何?
04:27
Yeah, that's it. I just have to
ask a few少數 questions問題.
76
255160
2456
是的,就這樣。
我只需要問幾個問題。
04:29
Man: Sure.
77
257640
1216
男子:沒問題。
04:30
PJPJ: What did you think
of this experiment實驗, was it easy簡單 or hard?
78
258880
2976
佩特:你覺得這個實驗如何,
容易或困難?
04:33
Man: It was easy簡單.
79
261880
1240
男子:容易。
04:36
PJPJ: During the experiments實驗,
80
264040
1336
佩特:在實驗過程中,
04:37
I actually其實 switched交換的
the pictures圖片 three times.
81
265400
3336
我其實把照片偷換了三次。
04:40
Was this anything you noticed注意到?
82
268760
1576
你有注意到這點嗎?
04:42
Man: No. I didn't notice注意 any of that.
83
270360
1816
男子:沒有,我沒注意到。
04:44
PJPJ: Not at all?
Man: No.
84
272200
1496
佩特:完全沒有?
男子:沒有。
04:45
Switching交換 the pictures圖片 as far as ...
85
273720
2096
換照片的意思是……
04:47
PJPJ: Yeah, you were pointing指點 at one of them
but I actually其實 gave you the opposite對面.
86
275840
3816
佩特:是的,你指著其中一張照片,
但我其實給你的是另一張。
04:51
Man: The opposite對面 one.
OK, when you --
87
279680
1816
男子:另一張。好,當你──
04:53
No. Shows展會 you how much
my attention注意 span跨度 was.
88
281520
2256
不。這展現我的注意力持續多長。
04:55
(Laughter笑聲)
89
283800
1520
(笑聲)
04:58
PJPJ: Did you notice注意 that sometimes有時
during the experiment實驗
90
286880
3016
佩特:你有注意到,在實驗過程中,
05:01
I switched交換的 the pictures圖片?
91
289920
2136
我有時偷換了照片?
05:04
Woman女人 2: No, I did not notice注意 that.
92
292080
2016
女子 2:沒有,我沒注意到。
05:06
PJPJ: You were pointing指點 at one,
but then I gave you the other one.
93
294120
3000
佩特:你指著這一張照片時,
我接著會給你另一張。
05:09
No inclination傾角 of that happening事件?
94
297920
1616
不知道有發生這件事?
05:11
Woman女人 2: No.
95
299560
1576
女子 2:不知道。
05:13
Woman女人 2: I did not notice注意.
96
301160
1256
女子 2:我沒注意到。
05:14
(Laughs)
97
302440
1936
(笑聲)
05:16
PJPJ: Thank you.
98
304400
1216
佩特:謝謝你。
05:17
Woman女人 2: Thank you.
99
305640
1376
女子 2:謝謝你。
05:19
PJPJ: OK, so as you probably大概
figured想通 out now,
100
307040
2056
(現場)佩特:好,
所以現在你們可能已經想通,
05:21
the trick is that I have
two cards in each hand,
101
309120
2256
技倆在於我每隻手上有兩張牌,
05:23
and when I hand one of them over,
102
311400
1576
當我把上面的牌移過去時,
05:25
the black黑色 one kind of disappears消失
into the black黑色 surface表面 on the table.
103
313000
4360
因為桌子表面是黑的,所以
下面黑色的那張就像消失了一樣。
05:30
So using運用 pictures圖片 like this,
104
318640
1736
用像這樣的照片,
05:32
normally一般 not more than 20 percent百分
of the participants參與者 detect檢測 these tries嘗試.
105
320400
4376
通常不到 20% 的
受試者會發現有詐。
05:36
And as you saw in the movie電影,
106
324800
1416
如同在影片中看到的,
05:38
when in the end結束
we explain說明 what's going on,
107
326240
3176
在最後我們會解釋發生了什麼事,
05:41
they're very surprised詫異 and often經常 refuse垃圾
to believe the trick has been made製作.
108
329440
4376
他們會很驚訝,通常會拒絕
相信我有使用這個技倆。
05:45
So this shows節目 that this effect影響
is quite相當 robust強大的 and a genuine真正 effect影響.
109
333840
4776
這表示,這種效應是
相當可靠且真實的效應。
05:50
But if you're interested有興趣
in self-knowledge自知之明, as I am,
110
338640
2656
但,如果你和我一樣,
對「自我知識」感興趣,
05:53
the more interesting有趣 bit is,
111
341320
1336
更有趣的部分是,
05:54
OK, so what did they say
when they explained解釋 these choices選擇?
112
342680
3936
當他們在解釋他們的選擇時,
他們說了什麼?
05:58
So we've我們已經 doneDONE a lot of analysis分析
113
346640
1496
我們做了很多分析,
06:00
of the verbal口頭 reports報告
in these experiments實驗.
114
348160
2080
分析這些實驗中的口頭報告。
06:03
And this graph圖形 simply只是 shows節目
115
351360
2456
這張圖顯示的是
06:05
that if you compare比較
what they say in a manipulated操縱 trial審訊
116
353840
4776
如果你把他們在有詐的
那幾回當中的說詞,
拿來和沒詐的那幾回做比較,
06:10
with a nonmanipulatednonmanipulated trial審訊,
117
358640
1376
也就是他們解釋正常選擇時的說詞,
06:12
that is when they explain說明
a normal正常 choice選擇 they've他們已經 made製作
118
360040
2776
和我們在選擇結果動手腳之後
他們的說詞做比較,
06:14
and one where we manipulated操縱 the outcome結果,
119
362840
2496
06:17
we find that they are remarkably異常 similar類似.
120
365360
2456
我們發現,說詞是非常像的。
06:19
So they are just as emotional情緒化,
just as specific具體,
121
367840
3056
這些說詞都一樣情緒化、一樣明確,
06:22
and they are expressed表達
with the same相同 level水平 of certainty肯定.
122
370920
3200
而且是用相同的肯定度說出來的。
06:27
So the strong強大 conclusion結論 to draw from this
123
375120
2336
這實驗能導出一個強力的結論,
06:29
is that if there are no differences分歧
124
377480
2216
如果在真正的選擇
06:31
between之間 a real真實 choice選擇
and a manipulated操縱 choice選擇,
125
379720
3696
和被操控的選擇之間沒有差異的話,
06:35
perhaps也許 we make things up all the time.
126
383440
2440
也許我們隨時隨地都是在編理由。
06:38
But we've我們已經 also doneDONE studies學習
127
386680
1336
但我們也有做些研究,
06:40
where we try to match比賽 what they say
with the actual實際 faces面孔.
128
388040
3016
試著把他們的說詞
和真實面孔來匹配。
06:43
And then we find things like this.
129
391080
1880
我們的發現是這樣的。
06:45
So here, this male participant參加者,
he preferred首選 the girl女孩 to the left,
130
393760
5056
這裡,這位男性受試者
偏好左邊的女子,
06:50
he ended結束 up with the one to the right.
131
398840
1856
但他拿到的是右邊的照片。
06:52
And then, he explained解釋
his choice選擇 like this.
132
400720
2816
接著,他是這樣解釋他的選擇。
06:55
"She is radiant輻射的.
133
403560
1296
「她容光煥發。
06:56
I would rather have approached接近 her
at the bar酒吧 than the other one.
134
404880
3096
在酒吧,我會比較想
接近她而不是其他人。
07:00
And I like earrings耳環."
135
408000
1616
且我喜歡她的耳環。」
07:01
And whatever隨你 made製作 him choose選擇
the girl女孩 on the left to begin開始 with,
136
409640
3496
不論一開始他是
為什麼選左邊的女子,
07:05
it can't have been the earrings耳環,
137
413160
1576
絕對不會是因為耳環,
07:06
because they were actually其實
sitting坐在 on the girl女孩 on the right.
138
414760
2856
因為其實只有右邊的女子才有耳環。
07:09
So this is a clear明確 example
of a post崗位 hoc特別 construction施工.
139
417640
3776
這是個很清楚的例子,
說明了「事後建構」。
07:13
So they just explained解釋
the choice選擇 afterwards之後.
140
421440
2800
他們是在事後才解釋他們的選擇。
07:17
So what this experiment實驗 shows節目 is,
141
425320
2296
這個實驗所顯示的是,
07:19
OK, so if we fail失敗 to detect檢測
that our choices選擇 have been changed,
142
427640
3656
如果我們沒能發現
我們的選擇被掉包了,
07:23
we will immediately立即 start開始
to explain說明 them in another另一個 way.
143
431320
3200
我們會馬上用另一種方式
來解釋我們的選擇。
07:27
And what we also found發現
144
435520
1256
我們也發現,
07:28
is that the participants參與者
often經常 come to prefer比較喜歡 the alternative替代,
145
436800
3216
受試者會漸漸喜歡上另一個選擇,
他們被誤導以為
自己喜歡的那個選擇。
07:32
that they were led to believe they liked喜歡.
146
440040
2256
07:34
So if we let them do the choice選擇 again,
147
442320
2016
如果我們再讓他們選一次,
07:36
they will now choose選擇 the face面對
they had previously先前 rejected拒絕.
148
444360
3760
他們現在會選的,
是他們先前沒選的那個。
07:41
So this is the effect影響
we call "choice選擇 blindness失明."
149
449520
2296
這個效應是所謂的「選擇盲目」。
07:43
And we've我們已經 doneDONE
a number of different不同 studies學習 --
150
451840
2216
我們做了許多不同的研究──
07:46
we've我們已經 tried試著 consumer消費者 choices選擇,
151
454080
2536
我們試過消費者選擇,
07:48
choices選擇 based基於 on taste味道 and smell
and even reasoning推理 problems問題.
152
456640
4416
依據味覺和嗅覺做的選擇,
甚至試過推理問題。
07:53
But what you all want to know is of course課程
153
461080
2056
但,當然,你們都想知道的是,
07:55
does this extend延伸 also
to more complex複雜, more meaningful富有意義的 choices選擇?
154
463160
3936
這個現象也會延伸到更複雜、
更有意義的選擇上嗎?
07:59
Like those concerning關於
moral道德 and political政治 issues問題.
155
467120
3080
比如和道德以及政治有關的選擇?
08:04
So the next下一個 experiment實驗,
it needs需求 a little bit of a background背景.
156
472400
4216
接下來的實驗需要一點點背景說明。
08:08
So in Sweden瑞典, the political政治 landscape景觀
157
476640
4256
在瑞典,政治的狀況是
08:12
is dominated佔主導地位 by a left-wing左翼
and a right-wing右翼 coalition聯盟.
158
480920
3360
由左翼和右翼組的聯合政府在主導。
08:17
And the voters選民 may可能 move移動 a little bit
between之間 the parties派對 within each coalition聯盟,
159
485720
4416
投票人可能會在每個聯盟中的
兩黨之間有一點點猶疑,
08:22
but there is very little movement運動
between之間 the coalitions聯盟.
160
490160
2760
但對不同聯盟之間的選擇
就幾乎不會猶疑。
08:25
And before each elections選舉,
161
493680
1976
在每次大選之前,
08:27
the newspapers報紙 and the polling輪詢 institutes機構
162
495680
4216
報紙和民意調查機構
08:31
put together一起 what they call
"an election選舉 compass羅盤"
163
499920
2616
會做出所謂的「選舉羅盤」,
08:34
which哪一個 consists of a number
of dividing issues問題
164
502560
3336
它包含了數個很有區分性的議題,
08:37
that sort分類 of separates中隔離 the two coalitions聯盟.
165
505920
2336
那些議題可以把兩個聯盟給區別開。
08:40
Things like if tax on gasoline汽油
should be increased增加
166
508280
3735
比如,汽油稅應該要提高,
08:44
or if the 13 months個月 of paid支付 parental父母 leave離開
167
512039
4096
或是十三個月的育嬰假是否應該
08:48
should be split分裂 equally一樣
between之間 the two parents父母
168
516159
2496
應該平等分給父親和母親,
08:50
in order訂購 to increase增加 gender性別 equality平等.
169
518679
2721
來改善性別平權。
08:54
So, before the last Swedish瑞典 election選舉,
170
522840
2216
所以,在上次瑞典大選之前,
08:57
we created創建 an election選舉 compass羅盤 of our own擁有.
171
525080
2600
我們做了我們自己的選舉羅盤。
09:00
So we walked up to people in the street
172
528480
2136
我們到街上找人,
09:02
and asked if they wanted
to do a quick political政治 survey調查.
173
530640
3336
問他們是否願意做個
快速的政治調查。
09:06
So first we had them state
their voting表決 intention意向
174
534000
2456
首先,我們請他們說出他們傾向於
09:08
between之間 the two coalitions聯盟.
175
536480
1360
投票給兩個聯盟中的哪一個。
09:10
Then we asked them
to answer回答 12 of these questions問題.
176
538560
3776
接著我們請他們回答
十二個這樣的問題。
09:14
They would fill in their answers答案,
177
542360
1976
他們會填寫他們的答案,
09:16
and we would ask them to discuss討論,
178
544360
1616
接著我們會請他們討論,
09:18
so OK, why do you think
tax on gas加油站 should be increased增加?
179
546000
5496
好,那你為什麼認為
汽油稅應該要提高?
09:23
And we'd星期三 go through通過 the questions問題.
180
551520
2096
我們把問題都問完。
09:25
Then we had a color顏色 coded編碼 template模板
181
553640
3896
接著,我們有個用顏色編碼的樣板,
09:29
that would allow允許 us
to tally相符 their overall總體 score得分了.
182
557560
2936
讓我們能計算他們的總分數。
09:32
So this person would have
one, two, three, four
183
560520
3456
這個人會有一、二、三、四、
09:36
five, six, seven, eight, nine
scores分數 to the left,
184
564000
3296
五、六、七、八、九分都是靠左的,
09:39
so he would lean to the left, basically基本上.
185
567320
2680
所以,基本上,他傾向左翼。
09:42
And in the end結束, we also had them
fill in their voting表決 intention意向 once一旦 more.
186
570800
4440
最後,我們會再次請他們
填寫他們的投票傾向。
09:48
But of course課程, there was
also a trick involved參與.
187
576160
2280
當然,我們耍了個小技倆。
09:51
So first, we walked up to people,
188
579360
2176
首先,我們走向路人,
09:53
we asked them
about their voting表決 intention意向
189
581560
2056
我們問他們的投票傾向,
09:55
and then when they started開始 filling填充 in,
190
583640
2256
接著,當他們開始填寫時,
09:57
we would fill in a set of answers答案
going in the opposite對面 direction方向.
191
585920
5456
我們會填寫一組相反的答案。
10:03
We would put it under the notepad記事本.
192
591400
2576
我們把這張紙放在筆記本的下方。
10:06
And when we get the questionnaire調查問卷,
193
594000
2776
當我們拿到問卷時,
10:08
we would simply只是 glue it on top最佳
of the participant's參與者的 own擁有 answer回答.
194
596800
3320
我們就把它黏在受測者的答案上面。
10:16
So there, it's gone走了.
195
604000
1240
就這樣,它不見了。
10:24
And then we would ask
about each of the questions問題:
196
612280
2376
接著,我們會針對
每個問題再問他們:
10:26
How did you reason原因 here?
197
614680
1536
你在這題的理由是什麼?
10:28
And they'll他們會 state the reasons原因,
198
616240
1736
他們會說明理由,
10:30
together一起 we will sum up
their overall總體 score得分了.
199
618000
2480
我們會一起把總分加起來。
10:34
And in the end結束, they will state
their voting表決 intention意向 again.
200
622800
3680
最終,他們會再次陳述
他們的投票傾向。
10:41
So what we find first of all here,
201
629960
1656
首先,我們發現的是,
10:43
is that very few少數 of these
manipulations操作 are detected檢測.
202
631640
4216
很少有人察覺到我們的技倆。
10:47
And they're not detected檢測
in the sense that they realize實現,
203
635880
2656
意思是說,他們並沒有發現:
10:50
"OK, you must必須 have changed my answer回答,"
204
638560
1856
「你一定有偷改我的答案。」
10:52
it was more the case案件 that,
205
640440
1256
通常比較會是:
10:53
"OK, I must've一定是 misunderstood誤解
the question the first time I read it.
206
641720
3176
「我一定是在第一次讀
問題時誤解了它的意思。
10:56
Can I please change更改 it?"
207
644920
1240
我能改正嗎?」
10:59
And even if a few少數 of these
manipulations操作 were changed,
208
647080
5136
即使有少數我們操控的部分被改了,
總的來說大部分都還是被忽視了。
11:04
the overall總體 majority多數 was missed錯過.
209
652240
2136
11:06
So we managed管理 to switch開關 90 percent百分
of the participants'參與者 answers答案
210
654400
3656
所以受試者的答案有 90%
都被我們成功偷換掉了,
11:10
from left to right, right to left,
their overall總體 profile輪廓.
211
658080
3160
整體的側寫上,
左翼換到右翼,右翼換到左翼。
11:14
And what happens發生 then when
they are asked to motivate刺激 their choices選擇?
212
662800
4400
當他們被問及為什麼要做
這個選擇時,會發生什麼事?
11:20
And here we find much more
interesting有趣 verbal口頭 reports報告
213
668160
3056
在這裡,我們得到的口頭報告,
11:23
than compared相比 to the faces面孔.
214
671240
2016
比之前面孔比較時的更有意思許多。
11:25
People say things like this,
and I'll read it to you.
215
673280
3360
人們會這樣回答,讓我讀給你們聽。
11:29
So, "Large-scale大規模 governmental政府 surveillance監控
of email電子郵件 and internet互聯網 traffic交通
216
677720
3736
「對電子郵件及網路流量的
大規模政府監控
11:33
ought應該 to be permissible可允許的 as means手段 to combat戰鬥
international國際 crime犯罪 and terrorism恐怖主義."
217
681480
4336
應該要被允許,做為對抗
國際犯罪和恐怖主義的手段。」
11:37
"So you agree同意 to some extent程度
with this statement聲明." "Yes."
218
685840
2716
「所以,你對這段陳述
算是認同。」「是的。」
11:40
"So how did you reason原因 here?"
219
688580
1500
「你的理由是什麼?」
11:43
"Well, like, as it is so hard to get
at international國際 crime犯罪 and terrorism恐怖主義,
220
691600
4936
「嗯,因為國際犯罪
和恐怖主義很難處理,
11:48
I think there should be
those kinds of tools工具."
221
696560
2776
我認為應該要有這類的工具。」
11:51
And then the person remembers記得 an argument論據
from the newspaper報紙 in the morning早上.
222
699360
3616
接著,這個人記起
在早報上的一段論述。
11:55
"Like in the newspaper報紙 today今天,
223
703000
1616
「就像今天的報紙寫的,
11:56
it said they can like,
listen to mobile移動 phones手機 from prison監獄,
224
704640
3376
它說,他們能夠聽到
從監獄打的行動電話,
如果幫派首領試圖從監獄內
繼續他的犯罪就會被發現。
12:00
if a gang結夥 leader領導 tries嘗試 to continue繼續
his crimes犯罪 from inside.
225
708040
3536
12:03
And I think it's madness瘋狂
that we have so little power功率
226
711600
2816
而我認為,如果我們沒有什麼力量
12:06
that we can't stop those things
227
714440
1656
能阻止這類事情,那就太瘋狂了,
12:08
when we actually其實 have
the possibility可能性 to do so."
228
716120
2936
因為我們其實是有可能做到的。」
12:11
And then there's a little bit
back and forth向前 in the end結束:
229
719080
2696
到最後,重申了一點:
12:13
"I don't like that they have access訪問
to everything I do,
230
721800
2576
「我不喜歡他們能
知道我所做的任何事,
12:16
but I still think
it's worth價值 it in the long run."
231
724400
2576
但我仍然認為長期來看是值得的。」
12:19
So, if you didn't know that this person
232
727000
2536
所以,如果你不知道這個人
12:21
just took part部分 in
a choice選擇 blindness失明 experiment實驗,
233
729560
2256
剛剛參與了一項選擇盲目實驗,
12:23
I don't think you would question
234
731840
1856
我想你應該不會質疑
12:25
that this is the true真正 attitude態度
of that person.
235
733720
3120
這是不是這個人的真實態度。
12:29
And what happens發生 in the end結束,
with the voting表決 intention意向?
236
737800
2856
最後的投票傾向又會發生什麼狀況?
12:32
What we find -- that one is also
clearly明確地 affected受影響 by the questionnaire調查問卷.
237
740680
4696
我們發現──
人也會明顯受到問卷的影響。
12:37
So we have 10 participants參與者
238
745400
1736
我們共有十名受試者
12:39
shifting from left to right
or from right to left.
239
747160
2976
從左翼變成右翼,
或從右翼變成左翼。
12:42
We have another另一個 19
that go from clear明確 voting表決 intention意向
240
750160
2536
我們還有十九名受試者,
投票傾向從明確變成不確定。
12:44
to being存在 uncertain不確定.
241
752720
1456
12:46
Some go from being存在 uncertain不確定
to clear明確 voting表決 intention意向.
242
754200
3096
有些是從不確定變成明確。
12:49
And then there is a number of participants參與者
staying uncertain不確定 throughout始終.
243
757320
4736
還有許多受試者
從頭到尾都一直不確定。
12:54
And that number is interesting有趣
244
762080
1576
那個數字很有意思,
12:55
because if you look
at what the polling輪詢 institutes機構 say
245
763680
4616
因為如果你看民意調查機構的說法,
13:00
the closer接近 you get to an election選舉,
246
768320
1656
越接近大選時,
13:02
the only people that are sort分類 of in play
247
770000
2136
唯一還會有影響力的人,
13:04
are the ones那些 that are
considered考慮 uncertain不確定.
248
772160
2656
就是被認為還不確定的人。
13:06
But we show顯示 there is a much larger number
249
774840
3216
但我們發現,有更多的人
13:10
that would actually其實 consider考慮
shifting their attitudes態度.
250
778080
2800
是確實會考慮轉變他們的態度的。
13:13
And here I must必須 point out, of course課程,
that you are not allowed允許 to use this
251
781640
3496
在這裡,我必須要指出,
當然你不能夠用這個方式
13:17
as an actual實際 method方法
to change更改 people's人們 votes
252
785160
2616
來真正在選舉前去改變選民
13:19
before an election選舉,
253
787800
1496
要投給誰,
13:21
and we clearly明確地 debriefed彙報 them afterwards之後
254
789320
3616
我們在事後有明確地跟他們做匯報,
13:24
and gave them every一切
opportunity機會 to change更改 back
255
792960
2296
給他們機會改回答案,
13:27
to whatever隨你 they thought first.
256
795280
2480
改回他們一開始的想法。
13:30
But what this shows節目 is
that if you can get people
257
798600
2336
但這實驗發現的是,
如果你能讓人民去看另一方的觀點,
13:32
to see the opposite對面 view視圖 and engage從事
in a conversation會話 with themselves他們自己,
258
800960
5536
並讓他們和自己進行對話,
13:38
that could actually其實 make them
change更改 their views意見.
259
806520
2920
其實有可能改變他們的觀點。
13:42
OK.
260
810400
1200
好。
13:44
So what does it all mean?
261
812760
1656
所以這一切的意思是什麼?
13:46
What do I think is going on here?
262
814440
2416
我認為這裡發生了什麼事?
13:48
So first of all,
263
816880
1216
首先,
13:50
a lot of what we call self-knowledge自知之明
is actually其實 self-interpretation自我詮釋.
264
818120
4856
我們所謂的自我知識,
其實大部分是自我詮釋。
13:55
So I see myself make a choice選擇,
265
823000
2496
我看到我自己做了一個選擇,
13:57
and then when I'm asked why,
266
825520
2776
接著,當我被問到為什麼時,
14:00
I just try to make
as much sense of it as possible可能
267
828320
2536
我就是盡可能去做解釋
14:02
when I make an explanation說明.
268
830880
1936
來讓這個選擇合理化。
14:04
But we do this so quickly很快
and with such這樣 ease緩解
269
832840
3016
但我們這麼做的過程既快又輕易,
14:07
that we think we actually其實 know the answer回答
when we answer回答 why.
270
835880
4280
誤以為自己知道「為什麼」的答案。
14:13
And as it is an interpretation解釋,
271
841040
3096
既然它只是一種詮釋,
14:16
of course課程 we sometimes有時 make mistakes錯誤.
272
844160
2296
當然我們有可能詮釋錯誤,
14:18
The same相同 way we make mistakes錯誤
when we try to understand理解 other people.
273
846480
3520
就像我們試圖了解他人時發生誤解。
14:23
So beware謹防 when you ask people
the question "why"
274
851160
3696
所以,當你問別人「為什麼」
這個問題時,要很小心,
14:26
because what may可能 happen發生
is that, if you asked them,
275
854880
4896
因為很有可能當你問他們為什麼,
14:31
"So why do you support支持 this issue問題?"
276
859800
4016
「你為什麼支持這個議題?」
14:35
"Why do you stay in this job工作
or this relationship關係?" --
277
863840
3216
「你為什麼不換工作,
為什麼持續這段戀情?」──
14:39
what may可能 happen發生 when you ask why
is that you actually其實 create創建 an attitude態度
278
867080
3416
當你問為什麼時
很可能會造出一種態度,
14:42
that wasn't there
before you asked the question.
279
870520
2240
造出在你發問前不存在的態度。
14:45
And this is of course課程 important重要
in your professional專業的 life, as well,
280
873440
3176
當然,這對你的職涯也很重要,
14:48
or it could be.
281
876640
1216
或可能很重要。
14:49
If, say, you design設計 something
and then you ask people,
282
877880
2536
比如你設計一樣東西,接著問別人:
14:52
"Why do you think this is good or bad?"
283
880440
2256
「你為什麼覺得它很好或不好?」
14:54
Or if you're a journalist記者
asking a politician政治家,
284
882720
3056
如果你是記者,去問政治人物:
14:57
"So, why did you make this decision決定?"
285
885800
2376
「你為什麼做這個決策?」
15:00
Or if indeed確實 you are a politician政治家
286
888200
1936
或如果你本身是政治人物,
15:02
and try to explain說明
why a certain某些 decision決定 was made製作.
287
890160
2640
試著要解釋為什麼會做出某個決策。
15:06
So this may可能 all seem似乎 a bit disturbing煩擾的.
288
894080
3576
這一切聽起來有點讓人不安。
15:09
But if you want to look at it
from a positive direction方向,
289
897680
3496
但如果從正面來看,
15:13
it could be seen看到 as showing展示,
290
901200
1736
可以把它視為是展示出……
15:14
OK, so we're actually其實
a little bit more flexible靈活 than we think.
291
902960
3376
我們其實比自認的還更有彈性。
15:18
We can change更改 our minds頭腦.
292
906360
1896
我們能改變心意。
15:20
Our attitudes態度 are not set in stone.
293
908280
2456
我們的態度不是一成不變的。
15:22
And we can also change更改
the minds頭腦 of others其他,
294
910760
3176
我們也能改變他人的心意,
15:25
if we can only get them
to engage從事 with the issue問題
295
913960
2376
只要我們能讓他們
真正去了解那個問題,
15:28
and see it from the opposite對面 view視圖.
296
916360
1680
從另一個角度去看那問題。
15:31
And in my own擁有 personal個人 life,
since以來 starting開始 with this research研究 --
297
919400
3936
在我自己的生活中──
自從開始這項研究之後,
15:35
So my partner夥伴 and I,
we've我們已經 always had the rule規則
298
923360
2576
我的搭擋和我就一直遵守一條規則,
15:37
that you're allowed允許 to take things back.
299
925960
2296
那就是:你可以反悔。
15:40
Just because I said
I liked喜歡 something a year ago,
300
928280
2336
因為一年前我說過喜歡某樣東西,
15:42
doesn't mean I have to like it still.
301
930640
2040
並不表示我現在仍然得要喜歡它。
15:45
And getting得到 rid擺脫 of the need
to stay consistent一貫
302
933480
2816
擺脫「需要維持一致性」的需求,
15:48
is actually其實 a huge巨大 relief浮雕 and makes品牌
relational相關的 life so mush濃粥 easier更輕鬆 to live生活.
303
936320
4360
其實能讓人大大鬆一口氣,
也讓我們能夠輕鬆過人際的生活。
15:53
Anyway無論如何, so the conclusion結論 must必須 be:
304
941720
2360
總之,結論就是:
15:57
know that you don't know yourself你自己.
305
945320
2496
要知道你並不了解自己,
15:59
Or at least最小 not as well
as you think you do.
306
947840
2320
或是至少沒有你想像的那麼了解。
16:03
Thanks謝謝.
307
951480
1216
謝謝。
16:04
(Applause掌聲)
308
952720
4640
(掌聲)
Translated by Lilian Chiu
Reviewed by Yanyan Hong

▲Back to top

ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Petter Johansson - Experimental psychologist
Petter Johansson and his research group study self-knowledge and attitude change using methods ranging from questionnaires to close-up card magic.

Why you should listen

Petter Johansson is an associate professor in cognitive science, and together with Lars Hall he runs the Choice Blindness Lab at Lund University in Sweden. 
 
The main theme of Johansson's research is self-knowledge: How much do we know about ourselves, and how do we come to acquire this knowledge? To study these questions, he and his collaborators have developed an experimental paradigm known as "choice blindness." The methodological twist in these experiments is to use magic tricks to manipulate the outcome of people's choices -- and then measure to what extent and in what ways people react to these changes. The general finding is that participants often fail to detect when they receive the opposite of their choice, and when asked to explain, they readily construct and confabulate answers motivating a choice they only believe they intended to make. The effect has been demonstrated in choice experiments on topics such as facial attractiveness, consumer choice and moral and political decision making.

More profile about the speaker
Petter Johansson | Speaker | TED.com

Data provided by TED.

This site was created in May 2015 and the last update was on January 12, 2020. It will no longer be updated.

We are currently creating a new site called "eng.lish.video" and would be grateful if you could access it.

If you have any questions or suggestions, please feel free to write comments in your language on the contact form.

Privacy Policy

Developer's Blog

Buy Me A Coffee