TED2009
Dan Ariely: Our buggy moral code
Dan Ariely om vores forfejlede moral kodeks
Filmed:
Readability: 3.2
3,509,395 views
Adfærdsøkonomen Dan Ariely studerer vores fejl i vores moral kodeks: den underliggende grund til at vi synes det er i orden at snyde eller stjæle (nogle gange). Smarte studier hjælper med at vise pointen i hans argument, at vi er forudsigeligt irrationelle - og at vi kan blive påvirket på måder vi ikke kan forestille os.
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. Full bio
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.
00:16
I want to talk to you today a little bit
0
1000
2000
I dag vil jeg fortælle jer
00:18
about predictable irrationality.
1
3000
3000
om forudsigelig irrationalitet.
00:21
And my interest in irrational behavior
2
6000
4000
Og min interesse i irrationel adfærd
00:25
started many years ago in the hospital.
3
10000
3000
startede for mange år siden på hospitalet.
00:28
I was burned very badly.
4
13000
4000
Jeg var slemt forbrændt.
00:32
And if you spend a lot of time in hospital,
5
17000
3000
Og hvis man tilbringer meget tid på hospitalet,
00:35
you'll see a lot of types of irrationalities.
6
20000
3000
vil man se mange former for irrationalitet.
00:38
And the one that particularly bothered me in the burn department
7
23000
5000
Og noget der virkelig gik mig på i afdelingen for brændsår,
00:43
was the process by which the nurses took the bandage off me.
8
28000
4000
var den måde hvorpå sygeplejerskerne tog mine forbindinger af.
00:48
Now, you must have all taken a Band-Aid off at some point,
9
33000
2000
I har formentlig alle prøvet at tage et plaster af på et tidspunkt,
00:50
and you must have wondered what's the right approach.
10
35000
3000
og I må have spekuleret på hvilken fremgangsmåde der er den rigtige.
00:53
Do you rip it off quickly -- short duration but high intensity --
11
38000
4000
River man det af hurtigt - kort varighed men høj intensitet -
00:57
or do you take your Band-Aid off slowly --
12
42000
2000
eller tager man det langsomt af -
00:59
you take a long time, but each second is not as painful --
13
44000
4000
man bruger lang tid, men hvert sekund er ikke nær så smertefuldt -
01:03
which one of those is the right approach?
14
48000
3000
hvilken af disse fremgangsmåder er den rigtige?
01:06
The nurses in my department thought that the right approach
15
51000
4000
Sygeplejerskerne på min afdeling mente, at den rette fremgangsmåde
01:10
was the ripping one, so they would grab hold and they would rip,
16
55000
3000
var den hvor man river, så de ville tage fat og de ville rive,
01:13
and they would grab hold and they would rip.
17
58000
2000
og de ville tage fat og de ville rive.
01:15
And because I had 70 percent of my body burned, it would take about an hour.
18
60000
4000
Og fordi 70 procent af min krop var forbrændt, ville det tage omkring en time.
01:19
And as you can imagine,
19
64000
3000
Og som i kan forestille jer,
01:22
I hated that moment of ripping with incredible intensity.
20
67000
4000
hadede jeg det øjeblik hvor de rev, med utrolig stor intensitet.
01:26
And I would try to reason with them and say,
21
71000
2000
Og jeg ville prøve at tale dem til fornuft og sige,
01:28
"Why don't we try something else?
22
73000
1000
"Hvorfor prøver vi ikke noget andet?
01:29
Why don't we take it a little longer --
23
74000
2000
Hvorfor bruger vi ikke lidt længere tid -
01:31
maybe two hours instead of an hour -- and have less of this intensity?"
24
76000
5000
måske to timer i stedet for en time - så denne intensitet bliver mindre?"
01:36
And the nurses told me two things.
25
81000
2000
Og sygeplejerskerne fortalte mig to ting.
01:38
They told me that they had the right model of the patient --
26
83000
4000
De sagde at de havde den rette model af patienten -
01:42
that they knew what was the right thing to do to minimize my pain --
27
87000
3000
at de vidste hvad der var den rette ting at gøre for at minimere min smerte.
01:45
and they also told me that the word patient doesn't mean
28
90000
3000
og de fortalte mig at ordet patient (tålmodig) ikke betyder
01:48
to make suggestions or to interfere or ...
29
93000
2000
at komme med forslag eller afbryde eller...
01:50
This is not just in Hebrew, by the way.
30
95000
3000
Det er ikke kun sådan på hebraisk, for øvrigt.
01:53
It's in every language I've had experience with so far.
31
98000
3000
Sådan er det på alle sprog jeg har stiftet bekendtskab med indtil videre.
01:56
And, you know, there's not much -- there wasn't much I could do,
32
101000
4000
Og der var ikke rigtig - der var ikke så meget jeg kunne gøre,
02:00
and they kept on doing what they were doing.
33
105000
3000
og de blev ved med at gøre hvad de gjorde.
02:03
And about three years later, when I left the hospital,
34
108000
2000
Og cirka tre år senere, da jeg forlod hospitalet,
02:05
I started studying at the university.
35
110000
3000
begyndte jeg at studere på universitetet.
02:08
And one of the most interesting lessons I learned
36
113000
3000
Og en af de mest interessante ting jeg lærte
02:11
was that there is an experimental method
37
116000
2000
var at der er en eksperimentel metode,
02:13
that if you have a question you can create a replica of this question
38
118000
4000
at hvis man har et spørgsmål, så kan man skabe en kopi af dette spørgsmål
02:17
in some abstract way, and you can try to examine this question,
39
122000
4000
på en abstrakt måde, og man kan så forsøge at undersøge dette spørgsmål,
02:21
maybe learn something about the world.
40
126000
2000
og måske lære lidt omkring verden.
02:23
So that's what I did.
41
128000
2000
Så det var det jeg gjorde.
02:25
I was still interested
42
130000
1000
Jeg var stadig interesseret
02:26
in this question of how do you take bandages off burn patients.
43
131000
2000
i det her spørgsmål om hvordan man tager forbindinger af patienter med brændsår.
02:28
So originally I didn't have much money,
44
133000
3000
Så, oprindeligt havde jeg ikke særligt mange penge,
02:31
so I went to a hardware store and I bought a carpenter's vice.
45
136000
4000
så jeg gik ned i en værktøjsforretning og jeg købte en skruetvinge.
02:35
And I would bring people to the lab and I would put their finger in it,
46
140000
4000
Og jeg tog folk med til laboratoriet og jeg puttede deres fingre ind i den,
02:39
and I would crunch it a little bit.
47
144000
2000
og jeg klemte dem en lille smule.
02:41
(Laughter)
48
146000
2000
(Latter)
02:43
And I would crunch it for long periods and short periods,
49
148000
3000
Og jeg klemte dem i lang tid og i kort tid,
02:46
and pain that went up and pain that went down,
50
151000
2000
og smerte der steg og smerte der aftog,
02:48
and with breaks and without breaks -- all kinds of versions of pain.
51
153000
4000
og med pauser og uden pauser - alle mulige former for smerte.
02:52
And when I finished hurting people a little bit, I would ask them,
52
157000
2000
Og efter jeg havde påført folk en lille smule smerte, ville jeg spørge dem,
02:54
so, how painful was this? Or, how painful was this?
53
159000
2000
nå, hvor smertefuldt var det her? Eller, hvor smertefuldt var det her?
02:56
Or, if you had to choose between the last two,
54
161000
2000
Eller, hvis du skulle vælge mellem de sidste to,
02:58
which one would you choose?
55
163000
2000
hvilken ville du så vælge?
03:00
(Laughter)
56
165000
3000
(Latter)
03:03
I kept on doing this for a while.
57
168000
3000
Jeg blev ved med at gøre dette i et stykke tid.
03:06
(Laughter)
58
171000
2000
(Latter)
03:08
And then, like all good academic projects, I got more funding.
59
173000
4000
Og så, ligesom med alle andre gode akademiske projekter, fik jeg mere støtte.
03:12
I moved to sounds, electrical shocks --
60
177000
2000
Jeg gik over til lyde, elektrochok -
03:14
I even had a pain suit that I could get people to feel much more pain.
61
179000
5000
Jeg havde tilmed en smertedragt som kunne få folk til at føle meget mere smerte.
03:19
But at the end of this process,
62
184000
4000
Men til sidst i denne proces,
03:23
what I learned was that the nurses were wrong.
63
188000
3000
var det jeg lærte, at sygeplejerskerne tog fejl.
03:26
Here were wonderful people with good intentions
64
191000
3000
Her var disse vidunderlige mennesker med gode intentioner
03:29
and plenty of experience, and nevertheless
65
194000
2000
og med masser af erfaring, og alligevel
03:31
they were getting things wrong predictably all the time.
66
196000
4000
tog de fejl forudsigeligt hele tiden.
03:35
It turns out that because we don't encode duration
67
200000
3000
Det viser sig, at fordi vi ikke tager højde for varighed
03:38
in the way that we encode intensity,
68
203000
2000
på samme måde som vi tager højde for intensitet,
03:40
I would have had less pain if the duration would have been longer
69
205000
4000
ville jeg have været i mindre smerte hvis varigheden havde været længere
03:44
and the intensity was lower.
70
209000
2000
og intensiteten havde været mindre.
03:46
It turns out it would have been better to start with my face,
71
211000
3000
Det viser sig, at det ville have været bedre at starte med mit ansigt,
03:49
which was much more painful, and move toward my legs,
72
214000
2000
hvilket var meget mere smertefuldt, og arbejde sig ned mod mine ben,
03:51
giving me a trend of improvement over time --
73
216000
3000
hvilket ville give mig en følelse af forbedring som tiden gik -
03:54
that would have been also less painful.
74
219000
1000
hvilket også ville have været mindre smertefuldt.
03:55
And it also turns out that it would have been good
75
220000
2000
Og det viser sig også, at det ville have været en god idé
03:57
to give me breaks in the middle to kind of recuperate from the pain.
76
222000
2000
at give mig pauser midt i, så jeg kunne komme mig ovenpå smerterne.
03:59
All of these would have been great things to do,
77
224000
2000
Alle disse ting havde været gode ting at gøre,
04:01
and my nurses had no idea.
78
226000
3000
og mine sygeplejersker havde ingen anelse.
04:04
And from that point on I started thinking,
79
229000
1000
Og fra det øjeblik begyndte jeg at tænke,
04:05
are the nurses the only people in the world who get things wrong
80
230000
3000
er sygeplejerskerne de eneste i verden der tager fejl
04:08
in this particular decision, or is it a more general case?
81
233000
3000
i lige netop denne beslutning, eller er det mere generelt?
04:11
And it turns out it's a more general case --
82
236000
2000
Og det viser sig at det er mere generelt -
04:13
there's a lot of mistakes we do.
83
238000
3000
der er mange fejl vi begår.
04:16
And I want to give you one example of one of these irrationalities,
84
241000
5000
Og jeg vil give jer et eksempel på en af disse irrationaliteter,
04:21
and I want to talk to you about cheating.
85
246000
3000
og jeg vil fortælle jer om at snyde.
04:24
And the reason I picked cheating is because it's interesting,
86
249000
2000
Og grunden til at jeg valgte snyd er fordi det er interessant,
04:26
but also it tells us something, I think,
87
251000
2000
men også fordi det fortæller os noget, synes jeg,
04:28
about the stock market situation we're in.
88
253000
3000
om situationen vi er i på aktiemarkedet.
04:31
So, my interest in cheating started
89
256000
3000
Nå men, min interesse for snyd begyndte
04:34
when Enron came on the scene, exploded all of a sudden,
90
259000
2000
da Enron kom på banen, eksploderede pludseligt,
04:36
and I started thinking about what is happening here.
91
261000
3000
og jeg begyndte at overveje hvad der foregik her.
04:39
Is it the case that there was kind of
92
264000
1000
Forholder det sig sådan, at der var en slags
04:40
a few apples who are capable of doing these things,
93
265000
3000
dårlige elementer der var i stand til at gøre den slags ting,
04:43
or are we talking a more endemic situation,
94
268000
2000
eller er der tale om en mere endemisk situation,
04:45
that many people are actually capable of behaving this way?
95
270000
4000
at mange mennesker er i stand til at opføre sig sådan?
04:49
So, like we usually do, I decided to do a simple experiment.
96
274000
4000
Så vi gjorde hvad vi som regel gør, jeg besluttede mig for at lave et simpelt eksperiment.
04:53
And here's how it went.
97
278000
1000
Og det forgik sådan her.
04:54
If you were in the experiment, I would pass you a sheet of paper
98
279000
3000
Hvis I var med i eksperimentet, ville jeg give jer et stykke papir
04:57
with 20 simple math problems that everybody could solve,
99
282000
4000
med 20 simple regnestykker som alle og enhver kunne løse,
05:01
but I wouldn't give you enough time.
100
286000
2000
men jeg ville ikke give jer nok tid.
05:03
When the five minutes were over, I would say,
101
288000
2000
Da de 5 minutter var ovre, ville jeg sige,
05:05
"Pass me the sheets of paper, and I'll pay you a dollar per question."
102
290000
3000
"Giv mig papirene og så giver jeg jer en dollar per spørgsmål."
05:08
People did this. I would pay people four dollars for their task --
103
293000
4000
Folk gjorde dette. Jeg betalte fire dollar for deres opgave -
05:12
on average people would solve four problems.
104
297000
2000
folk ville i gennemsnit løse fire stykker.
05:14
Other people I would tempt to cheat.
105
299000
3000
Andre folk ville jeg friste med at snyde.
05:17
I would pass their sheet of paper.
106
302000
1000
Jeg ville sende papirene rundt.
05:18
When the five minutes were over, I would say,
107
303000
2000
Når de fem minutter var overstået ville jeg sige,
05:20
"Please shred the piece of paper.
108
305000
1000
"Vær så venlig at rive papirene i stykker.
05:21
Put the little pieces in your pocket or in your backpack,
109
306000
3000
Put de små stykker i jeres lomme eller taske,
05:24
and tell me how many questions you got correctly."
110
309000
3000
og fortæl mig hvor mange spørgsmål I fik rigtige."
05:27
People now solved seven questions on average.
111
312000
3000
Folk "løste" nu syv spørgsmål i gennemsnit.
05:30
Now, it wasn't as if there was a few bad apples --
112
315000
5000
Og nu var det altså ikke sådan at der var enkelte dårlige elementer -
05:35
a few people cheated a lot.
113
320000
3000
enkelte der snød meget.
05:38
Instead, what we saw is a lot of people who cheat a little bit.
114
323000
3000
I stedet var det vi så, at mange snyder en lille smule.
05:41
Now, in economic theory,
115
326000
3000
Ifølge økonomisk teori,
05:44
cheating is a very simple cost-benefit analysis.
116
329000
3000
er snyderi en ganske simpel cost-benefit analyse.
05:47
You say, what's the probability of being caught?
117
332000
2000
Man spørger sig selv, "hvad er sandsynligheden for at blive opdaget?
05:49
How much do I stand to gain from cheating?
118
334000
3000
Hvor meget får jeg ud af at snyde?
05:52
And how much punishment would I get if I get caught?
119
337000
2000
Og hvor stor er straffen hvis jeg bliver opdaget?"
05:54
And you weigh these options out --
120
339000
2000
Og man vejer disse muligheder op imod hinanden -
05:56
you do the simple cost-benefit analysis,
121
341000
2000
man laver den simple cost-benefit analyse,
05:58
and you decide whether it's worthwhile to commit the crime or not.
122
343000
3000
og man beslutter hvorvidt det kan betale sig at bryde loven eller ej.
06:01
So, we try to test this.
123
346000
2000
Så det forsøger vi at afprøve.
06:03
For some people, we varied how much money they could get away with --
124
348000
4000
For nogle folk ændrede vi på hvor mange penge de kunne slippe afsted med -
06:07
how much money they could steal.
125
352000
1000
hvor mange penge de kunne stjæle.
06:08
We paid them 10 cents per correct question, 50 cents,
126
353000
3000
Vi betalte dem 10 cents per korrekt svar, 50 cents,
06:11
a dollar, five dollars, 10 dollars per correct question.
127
356000
3000
en dollar, fem dollars, 10 dollars per korrekt svar.
06:14
You would expect that as the amount of money on the table increases,
128
359000
4000
Man ville forvente at efterhånden som mængden af af penge på bordet stiger,
06:18
people would cheat more, but in fact it wasn't the case.
129
363000
3000
ville folk snyde mere, men det var rent faktisk ikke tilfældet.
06:21
We got a lot of people cheating by stealing by a little bit.
130
366000
3000
Vi fik mange til at snyde ved at stjæle en lille smule.
06:24
What about the probability of being caught?
131
369000
3000
Hvad med sandsynligheden for at blive opdaget?
06:27
Some people shredded half the sheet of paper,
132
372000
2000
Nogle folk rev halvdelen af papiret i stykker,
06:29
so there was some evidence left.
133
374000
1000
så der var en smule bevis tilbage.
06:30
Some people shredded the whole sheet of paper.
134
375000
2000
Nogle folk rev hele papiret i stykker.
06:32
Some people shredded everything, went out of the room,
135
377000
3000
Nogle folk rev det hele i stykker, gik ud af lokalet,
06:35
and paid themselves from the bowl of money that had over 100 dollars.
136
380000
3000
og betalte sig selv ved hjælp af den skål med penge der indeholdt over 100 dollars.
06:38
You would expect that as the probability of being caught goes down,
137
383000
3000
Man skulle tro, at efterhånden som sandsynlighed for at blive opdaget bliver mindre,
06:41
people would cheat more, but again, this was not the case.
138
386000
3000
ville folk snyde mere, men igen, det var ikke tilfældet.
06:44
Again, a lot of people cheated by just by a little bit,
139
389000
3000
Igen var der mange der kun snød en lille smule,
06:47
and they were insensitive to these economic incentives.
140
392000
3000
og de var ligeglade med disse økonomiske incitamenter.
06:50
So we said, "If people are not sensitive
141
395000
1000
Så vi sagde, "Hvis folk er ligeglade
06:51
to the economic rational theory explanations, to these forces,
142
396000
5000
med de økonomisk rationelle teori forklaringer, med disse kræfter,
06:56
what could be going on?"
143
401000
3000
hvad kunne der så være på færde?"
06:59
And we thought maybe what is happening is that there are two forces.
144
404000
3000
Og vi tænkte at det der måske skete var, at der er to kræfter på spil.
07:02
At one hand, we all want to look at ourselves in the mirror
145
407000
2000
På den ene side vil vi alle gerne kunne se os selv i spejlet
07:04
and feel good about ourselves, so we don't want to cheat.
146
409000
3000
og have det godt med os selv, så vi vil ikke snyde.
07:07
On the other hand, we can cheat a little bit,
147
412000
2000
På den anden side kan vi snyde en lille smule,
07:09
and still feel good about ourselves.
148
414000
2000
og stadig have det godt med os selv.
07:11
So, maybe what is happening is that
149
416000
1000
Så det der måske sker,
07:12
there's a level of cheating we can't go over,
150
417000
2000
er at der er en grænse for snyd som vi ikke kan overskride,
07:14
but we can still benefit from cheating at a low degree,
151
419000
4000
men vi kan stadig få noget ud af at snyde en lille smule,
07:18
as long as it doesn't change our impressions about ourselves.
152
423000
3000
så længe det bare ikke ændrer på vores opfattelse af os selv.
07:21
We call this like a personal fudge factor.
153
426000
3000
Det er hvad vi kalder en personlig fuskefaktor.
07:25
Now, how would you test a personal fudge factor?
154
430000
4000
Så hvordan kan man teste en personlig fuskefaktor?
07:29
Initially we said, what can we do to shrink the fudge factor?
155
434000
4000
Til at starte med sagde vi, "Hvad kan vi gøre for at formindske fuskefaktoren?"
07:33
So, we got people to the lab, and we said,
156
438000
2000
Så vi fik folk til laboratoriet og vi sagde,
07:35
"We have two tasks for you today."
157
440000
2000
"Vi har to opgaver til dig i dag."
07:37
First, we asked half the people
158
442000
1000
Først bad vi halvdelen af folkene
07:38
to recall either 10 books they read in high school,
159
443000
2000
om enten at huske 10 bøger de havde læst på gymnasiet,
07:40
or to recall The Ten Commandments,
160
445000
3000
eller at huske de ti bud,
07:43
and then we tempted them with cheating.
161
448000
2000
og så fristede vi dem til at snyde.
07:45
Turns out the people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments --
162
450000
3000
Det viser sig, at med dem som prøvede at huske de ti bud -
07:48
and in our sample nobody could recall all of The Ten Commandments --
163
453000
2000
og i vores samling af folk var der ingen der kunne huske alle de ti bud -
07:51
but those people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments,
164
456000
4000
men de folk der prøvede at huske de ti bud,
07:55
given the opportunity to cheat, did not cheat at all.
165
460000
3000
når de fik muligheden for at snyde, snød de overhovedet ikke.
07:58
It wasn't that the more religious people --
166
463000
2000
Det var ikke sådan at de mere religiøse folk -
08:00
the people who remembered more of the Commandments -- cheated less,
167
465000
1000
altså dem der huskede flere af de ti bud - snød mindre,
08:01
and the less religious people --
168
466000
2000
og de mindre religiøse -
08:03
the people who couldn't remember almost any Commandments --
169
468000
1000
dem der stort set ikke kunne huske nogen af de ti bud -
08:04
cheated more.
170
469000
2000
snød mere.
08:06
The moment people thought about trying to recall The Ten Commandments,
171
471000
4000
Så snart folk prøvede at huske de ti bud,
08:10
they stopped cheating.
172
475000
1000
holdt de op med at snyde.
08:11
In fact, even when we gave self-declared atheists
173
476000
2000
Faktisk, selv når vi fik selvproklamerede ateister
08:13
the task of swearing on the Bible and we give them a chance to cheat,
174
478000
4000
til at sværge på biblen og vi gav dem chancen for at snyde,
08:17
they don't cheat at all.
175
482000
2000
snød de overhovedet ikke.
08:21
Now, Ten Commandments is something that is hard
176
486000
2000
Nå men, de ti bud er noget der er svært
08:23
to bring into the education system, so we said,
177
488000
2000
at bringe ind i uddannelsessystemet, så vi sagde,
08:25
"Why don't we get people to sign the honor code?"
178
490000
2000
"Hvorfor får vi ikke folk til at underskrive æreskodekset?"
08:27
So, we got people to sign,
179
492000
2000
Så vi fik folk til at skrive under på,
08:29
"I understand that this short survey falls under the MIT Honor Code."
180
494000
4000
"Jeg forstår at dette spørgeskema henholder sig til MITs æreskodeks"
08:33
Then they shredded it. No cheating whatsoever.
181
498000
3000
Derefter rev de det i stykker. Ingen snyd overhovedet.
08:36
And this is particularly interesting,
182
501000
1000
Og dette er især interessant,
08:37
because MIT doesn't have an honor code.
183
502000
2000
fordi MIT slet ikke har noget æreskodeks.
08:39
(Laughter)
184
504000
5000
(Latter)
08:44
So, all this was about decreasing the fudge factor.
185
509000
4000
Så alt dette handlede om at sætte fuskefaktoren ned.
08:48
What about increasing the fudge factor?
186
513000
3000
Hvad med at sætte fuskefaktoren op?
08:51
The first experiment -- I walked around MIT
187
516000
2000
Det første eksperiment - jeg gik rundt på MIT
08:53
and I distributed six-packs of Cokes in the refrigerators --
188
518000
3000
og jeg fordelte six-packs af colaer i køleskabene -
08:56
these were common refrigerators for the undergrads.
189
521000
2000
disse var de studerendes fælles-køleskabe.
08:58
And I came back to measure what we technically call
190
523000
3000
Og jeg kom tilbage for at måle hvad vi teknisk set kalder
09:01
the half-lifetime of Coke -- how long does it last in the refrigerators?
191
526000
4000
colaens halveringstid - hvor lang tid overlever den i køleskabet?
09:05
As you can expect it doesn't last very long; people take it.
192
530000
3000
Som man kan forvente overlever den ikke særligt længe. Folk tager den.
09:08
In contrast, I took a plate with six one-dollar bills,
193
533000
4000
Til kontrast tog jeg en tallerken med seks en-dollar sedler,
09:12
and I left those plates in the same refrigerators.
194
537000
3000
og jeg stillede disse tallerkener i køleskabene.
09:15
No bill ever disappeared.
195
540000
1000
Ingen seddel forsvandt nogensinde.
09:16
Now, this is not a good social science experiment,
196
541000
3000
Men det her er ikke noget godt videnskabeligt social eksperiment,
09:19
so to do it better I did the same experiment
197
544000
3000
så for at gøre det bedre lavede jeg det samme eksperiment
09:22
as I described to you before.
198
547000
2000
som jeg beskrev for jer før.
09:24
A third of the people we passed the sheet, they gave it back to us.
199
549000
3000
En tredjedel af de folk vi havde sendt papiret rundt til, gav det tilbage til os.
09:27
A third of the people we passed it to, they shredded it,
200
552000
3000
En tredjedel af de folk vi havde sendt det rundt til, rev det itu,
09:30
they came to us and said,
201
555000
1000
de kom til os og sagde,
09:31
"Mr. Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X dollars."
202
556000
3000
"Hr. Eksperimentator, jeg løste X problemer. Giv mig X dollars."
09:34
A third of the people, when they finished shredding the piece of paper,
203
559000
3000
En tredjedel af folkene, når de var færdige med at rive papiret itu,
09:37
they came to us and said,
204
562000
2000
kom op til os og sagde,
09:39
"Mr Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X tokens."
205
564000
6000
Hr. Eksperimentator, jeg løste X problemer. Giv mig X poletter."
09:45
We did not pay them with dollars; we paid them with something else.
206
570000
3000
Vi betalte dem ikke med dollars. Vi betalte dem med noget andet.
09:48
And then they took the something else, they walked 12 feet to the side,
207
573000
3000
Og så tog de deres noget andet, gik 4 meter til siden,
09:51
and exchanged it for dollars.
208
576000
2000
og vekslede dem til dollars.
09:53
Think about the following intuition.
209
578000
2000
Overvej den følgende intuition.
09:55
How bad would you feel about taking a pencil from work home,
210
580000
3000
Hvor dårligt vil du have det med at tage en blyant med hjem fra arbejdet,
09:58
compared to how bad would you feel
211
583000
2000
i forhold til hvor dårligt du vil have det
10:00
about taking 10 cents from a petty cash box?
212
585000
2000
med at tage 10 cents fra en 'petty cash' boks?
10:02
These things feel very differently.
213
587000
3000
Disse ting føles meget forskelligt.
10:05
Would being a step removed from cash for a few seconds
214
590000
3000
Ville det, at være et lille skridt fjernet fra kontanter i et par sekunder
10:08
by being paid by token make a difference?
215
593000
3000
ved at blive betalt med poletter, gøre en forskel?
10:11
Our subjects doubled their cheating.
216
596000
2000
Vores testpersoner fordoblede deres snyderi.
10:13
I'll tell you what I think
217
598000
2000
Jeg skal fortæller jer hvad jeg tror
10:15
about this and the stock market in a minute.
218
600000
2000
om dette og om aktiemarkedet om lidt.
10:18
But this did not solve the big problem I had with Enron yet,
219
603000
4000
Men dette løste ikke det store problem jeg havde med Enron endnu,
10:22
because in Enron, there's also a social element.
220
607000
3000
fordi i Enron er der også en social faktor.
10:25
People see each other behaving.
221
610000
1000
Folk ser hvordan hinanden opfører sig.
10:26
In fact, every day when we open the news
222
611000
2000
Faktisk, hver dag når vi ser nyhederne
10:28
we see examples of people cheating.
223
613000
2000
ser vi eksempler på folk der snyder.
10:30
What does this cause us?
224
615000
3000
Hvad gør det ved os?
10:33
So, we did another experiment.
225
618000
1000
Så vi lavede et andet eksperiment.
10:34
We got a big group of students to be in the experiment,
226
619000
3000
Vi fik en stor gruppe af studerende med i eksperimentet,
10:37
and we prepaid them.
227
622000
1000
og vi betalte dem på forhånd.
10:38
So everybody got an envelope with all the money for the experiment,
228
623000
3000
Så alle fik en konvolut med alle pengene for eksperimentet,
10:41
and we told them that at the end, we asked them
229
626000
2000
og vi fortalte dem, at til slut ville vi bede dem
10:43
to pay us back the money they didn't make. OK?
230
628000
4000
om at betale os de penge tilbage som de ikke tjente. OK?
10:47
The same thing happens.
231
632000
1000
Det samme sker.
10:48
When we give people the opportunity to cheat, they cheat.
232
633000
2000
Når vi giver folk muligheden for at snyde, snyder de.
10:50
They cheat just by a little bit, all the same.
233
635000
3000
De snyder en lille smule, men de snyder.
10:53
But in this experiment we also hired an acting student.
234
638000
3000
Men til dette eksperiment hyrede vi også en skuespiller-elev.
10:56
This acting student stood up after 30 seconds, and said,
235
641000
4000
Denne elev rejste sig efter 30 sekunder og sagde,
11:00
"I solved everything. What do I do now?"
236
645000
3000
"Jeg har løst det hele. Hvad gør jeg nu?"
11:03
And the experimenter said, "If you've finished everything, go home.
237
648000
4000
Og eksperimentatoren sagde, "Hvis du er færdig med det hele, så gå hjem."
11:07
That's it. The task is finished."
238
652000
1000
Det var det. Opgaven var færdig.
11:08
So, now we had a student -- an acting student --
239
653000
4000
Så nu har vi en studerende - en skuespiller-elev -
11:12
that was a part of the group.
240
657000
2000
der var en del af en gruppe.
11:14
Nobody knew it was an actor.
241
659000
2000
Ingen vidste at det var en skuespiller.
11:16
And they clearly cheated in a very, very serious way.
242
661000
4000
Og de snød åbenlyst på en meget, meget alvorlig måde.
11:20
What would happen to the other people in the group?
243
665000
3000
Hvad ville der ske med de andre folk i gruppen?
11:23
Will they cheat more, or will they cheat less?
244
668000
3000
Ville de snyde mere, eller ville de snyde mindre?
11:26
Here is what happens.
245
671000
2000
Her er hvad der sker.
11:28
It turns out it depends on what kind of sweatshirt they're wearing.
246
673000
4000
Det viser sig, at det kommer an på hvilken trøje de har på.
11:32
Here is the thing.
247
677000
2000
Her er fidusen.
11:34
We ran this at Carnegie Mellon and Pittsburgh.
248
679000
3000
Vi gjorde dette på Carnegie Mellon og Pittsburgh.
11:37
And at Pittsburgh there are two big universities,
249
682000
2000
Og på Pittsburgh er der to store universiteter,
11:39
Carnegie Mellon and University of Pittsburgh.
250
684000
3000
Carnegie Mellon og University of Pittsburgh.
11:42
All of the subjects sitting in the experiment
251
687000
2000
Alle der deltog i eksperimentet
11:44
were Carnegie Mellon students.
252
689000
2000
studerede ved Carnegie Mellon.
11:46
When the actor who was getting up was a Carnegie Mellon student --
253
691000
4000
Når skuespilleren der rejste sig var fra Carnegie Mellon -
11:50
he was actually a Carnegie Mellon student --
254
695000
2000
han var rent faktisk fra Carnegie Mellon -
11:52
but he was a part of their group, cheating went up.
255
697000
4000
men han var en del af deres gruppe, steg snyderiet.
11:56
But when he actually had a University of Pittsburgh sweatshirt,
256
701000
4000
Men når han bar en University of Pittsburgh trøje,
12:00
cheating went down.
257
705000
2000
faldt snyderiet.
12:02
(Laughter)
258
707000
3000
(Latter)
12:05
Now, this is important, because remember,
259
710000
3000
Se, det her er vigtigt, for husk på,
12:08
when the moment the student stood up,
260
713000
2000
det øjeblik den studerende rejste sig,
12:10
it made it clear to everybody that they could get away with cheating,
261
715000
3000
stod det klart for alle at de kunne slippe afsted med at snyde,
12:13
because the experimenter said,
262
718000
2000
fordi eksperimentatoren sagde,
12:15
"You've finished everything. Go home," and they went with the money.
263
720000
2000
"Du er færdig med det hele. Gå hjem," og de gik med pengene.
12:17
So it wasn't so much about the probability of being caught again.
264
722000
3000
Så det handlede ikke så meget om sandsynligheden for at blive opdaget.
12:20
It was about the norms for cheating.
265
725000
3000
Det handlede om normerne for snyderi.
12:23
If somebody from our in-group cheats and we see them cheating,
266
728000
3000
Hvis nogen fra vores egen gruppe snyder og vi ser dem snyde,
12:26
we feel it's more appropriate, as a group, to behave this way.
267
731000
4000
føler vi at det er mere i orden, i gruppen, at opføre os sådan.
12:30
But if it's somebody from another group, these terrible people --
268
735000
2000
Men hvis nogen fra en anden gruppe, de dårlige mennesker -
12:32
I mean, not terrible in this --
269
737000
2000
jeg mener, ikke dårlige her -
12:34
but somebody we don't want to associate ourselves with,
270
739000
2000
men nogen som vi ikke selv vil associeres med,
12:36
from another university, another group,
271
741000
2000
fra et andet universitet, en anden gruppe,
12:38
all of a sudden people's awareness of honesty goes up --
272
743000
3000
pludselig stiger folks bevidsthed om ærlighed -
12:41
a little bit like The Ten Commandments experiment --
273
746000
2000
lidt ligesom med de ti bud eksperimentet -
12:43
and people cheat even less.
274
748000
4000
og folk snyder meget mindre.
12:47
So, what have we learned from this about cheating?
275
752000
4000
Så hvad har vi lært fra dette om snyderi?
12:51
We've learned that a lot of people can cheat.
276
756000
3000
Vi har lært at mange mennesker kan snyde.
12:54
They cheat just by a little bit.
277
759000
3000
De snyder bare en lille smule.
12:57
When we remind people about their morality, they cheat less.
278
762000
4000
Når vi minder folk om deres moralbegreber, snyder de mindre.
13:01
When we get bigger distance from cheating,
279
766000
3000
Når vi får større distance til snyd,
13:04
from the object of money, for example, people cheat more.
280
769000
4000
fra penge som et objekt, for eksempel, snyder folk mere.
13:08
And when we see cheating around us,
281
773000
2000
Og når vi ser snyderi omkring os,
13:10
particularly if it's a part of our in-group, cheating goes up.
282
775000
4000
især hvis det er en del af vores egen gruppe, går snyderiet op.
13:14
Now, if we think about this in terms of the stock market,
283
779000
3000
Så hvis vi tænker over dette i forbindelse med aktiemarkedet,
13:17
think about what happens.
284
782000
1000
overvej hvad der sker.
13:18
What happens in a situation when you create something
285
783000
3000
Hvad sker der i en situation når man skaber noget
13:21
where you pay people a lot of money
286
786000
2000
hvor folk betaler en masse penge
13:23
to see reality in a slightly distorted way?
287
788000
3000
for at se virkeligheden i en lettere fordrejet version?
13:26
Would they not be able to see it this way?
288
791000
3000
Ville de ikke være i stand til at se det sådan?
13:29
Of course they would.
289
794000
1000
Selvfølgelig ville de det.
13:30
What happens when you do other things,
290
795000
1000
Hvad sker der når man gør andre ting,
13:31
like you remove things from money?
291
796000
2000
såsom at fjerne ting fra penge?
13:33
You call them stock, or stock options, derivatives,
292
798000
3000
Man kalder dem aktier, aktieoptioner, derivater,
13:36
mortgage-backed securities.
293
801000
1000
mortgage-backed securities.
13:37
Could it be that with those more distant things,
294
802000
3000
Kunne det tænkes at med sådanne mere distancerede ting,
13:40
it's not a token for one second,
295
805000
2000
det er ikke en polet et øjeblik,
13:42
it's something that is many steps removed from money
296
807000
2000
det er noget der er mange skridt væk fra penge
13:44
for a much longer time -- could it be that people will cheat even more?
297
809000
4000
i meget længere tid - kunne det tænkes at folk ville snyde mere?
13:48
And what happens to the social environment
298
813000
2000
Og hvad sker der med det sociale miljø
13:50
when people see other people behave around them?
299
815000
3000
når folk ser hvordan andre folk opfører sig omkring dem?
13:53
I think all of those forces worked in a very bad way
300
818000
4000
Jeg tror at alle disse faktorer fungerer meget negativt
13:57
in the stock market.
301
822000
2000
på aktiemarkedet.
13:59
More generally, I want to tell you something
302
824000
3000
Mere generelt vil jeg gerne fortælle jer noget
14:02
about behavioral economics.
303
827000
3000
om adfærdsmæssig økonomi.
14:05
We have many intuitions in our life,
304
830000
4000
Vi har mange intuitioner i vores liv,
14:09
and the point is that many of these intuitions are wrong.
305
834000
3000
og pointen er at mange af disse intuitioner er forkerte.
14:12
The question is, are we going to test those intuitions?
306
837000
3000
Spørgsmålet er om vi vil afprøve disse intuitioner?
14:15
We can think about how we're going to test this intuition
307
840000
2000
Vi kan tænke over hvordan vi vil afprøve denne intuition
14:17
in our private life, in our business life,
308
842000
2000
i vores privatliv, i vores arbejdsliv,
14:19
and most particularly when it goes to policy,
309
844000
3000
og mest af alt, når det drejer sig om politik,
14:22
when we think about things like No Child Left Behind,
310
847000
3000
når vi tænker på ting som No Child Left Behind,
14:25
when you create new stock markets, when you create other policies --
311
850000
3000
når man skaber nye aktiemarkeder, når man skaber andre regler -
14:28
taxation, health care and so on.
312
853000
3000
skat, sygesikring og så videre.
14:31
And the difficulty of testing our intuition
313
856000
2000
Og det svære ved at teste vores intuition
14:33
was the big lesson I learned
314
858000
2000
var det jeg virkeligt lærte
14:35
when I went back to the nurses to talk to them.
315
860000
2000
da jeg tog tilbage til sygeplejerskerne for at tale med dem.
14:37
So I went back to talk to them
316
862000
2000
Så jeg tog tilbage for at tale med dem
14:39
and tell them what I found out about removing bandages.
317
864000
3000
og fortælle dem hvad jeg havde fundet ud af om at fjerne forbindinger.
14:42
And I learned two interesting things.
318
867000
2000
Og jeg lærte to interessante ting.
14:44
One was that my favorite nurse, Ettie,
319
869000
2000
Den ene var at min yndlingssygeplejerske, Ettie,
14:46
told me that I did not take her pain into consideration.
320
871000
4000
fortalte mig at jeg ikke overvejede hendes smerte.
14:50
She said, "Of course, you know, it was very painful for you.
321
875000
2000
Hun sagde, "Det var selvfølgelig meget smertefuldt for dig.
14:52
But think about me as a nurse,
322
877000
2000
Men tænk på mig som en sygeplejerske,
14:54
taking, removing the bandages of somebody I liked,
323
879000
2000
der tager, fjerner forbindingerne på en jeg syntes om,
14:56
and had to do it repeatedly over a long period of time.
324
881000
3000
og som jeg skulle gøre om og om igen over lang tid.
14:59
Creating so much torture was not something that was good for me, too."
325
884000
3000
At skabe så meget tortur var ikke noget der var godt for mig heller."
15:02
And she said maybe part of the reason was it was difficult for her.
326
887000
5000
Og hun sagde, måske delvist fordi det var så svært for hende.
15:07
But it was actually more interesting than that, because she said,
327
892000
3000
Men det var faktisk mere interessant end det, fordi hun sagde,
15:10
"I did not think that your intuition was right.
328
895000
5000
"Jeg troede ikke at din intuiton var rigtig.
15:15
I felt my intuition was correct."
329
900000
1000
Jeg følte at min intuition var korrekt."
15:16
So, if you think about all of your intuitions,
330
901000
2000
Så hvis man tænker over alle sine intuitioner,
15:18
it's very hard to believe that your intuition is wrong.
331
903000
4000
er det meget svært at forestille sig at ens intuition er forkert.
15:22
And she said, "Given the fact that I thought my intuition was right ..." --
332
907000
3000
Og hun sagde, "Ud fra det faktum at jeg troede at min intuition var rigtig..." -
15:25
she thought her intuition was right --
333
910000
2000
hun troede at hendes intuition var rigtig -
15:27
it was very difficult for her to accept doing a difficult experiment
334
912000
5000
var det meget svært for hende at acceptere at afprøve et vanskeligt eksperiment
15:32
to try and check whether she was wrong.
335
917000
2000
for at se om hun tog fejl.
15:34
But in fact, this is the situation we're all in all the time.
336
919000
4000
Men det er jo faktisk den situation vi er i hele tiden.
15:38
We have very strong intuitions about all kinds of things --
337
923000
3000
Vi har stærke intuitioner, omkring alle mulige ting -
15:41
our own ability, how the economy works,
338
926000
3000
vores egne evner, hvordan økonomien er skruet sammen,
15:44
how we should pay school teachers.
339
929000
2000
hvordan vi bør betale skolelærere.
15:46
But unless we start testing those intuitions,
340
931000
3000
Men med mindre vi begynder at afprøve vores intuitioner,
15:49
we're not going to do better.
341
934000
2000
vil vi ikke blive bedre.
15:51
And just think about how better my life would have been
342
936000
2000
Og forestil jer hvor meget bedre mit liv kunne have været
15:53
if these nurses would have been willing to check their intuition,
343
938000
2000
hvis disse sygeplejersker havde været villige til at afprøve deres intuition,
15:55
and how everything would have been better
344
940000
1000
og hvordan alt havde været bedre
15:56
if we just start doing more systematic experimentation of our intuitions.
345
941000
5000
hvis vi bare begynder at lave mere systematiske eksperimenter af vores intuitioner.
16:01
Thank you very much.
346
946000
2000
Mange tak skal I have.
ABOUT THE SPEAKER
Dan Ariely - Behavioral economistThe 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