猴子像人一樣，也會(huì)“理財(cái)”？
在波多黎各海岸的一個(gè)島上，有人做了一次有意思的猴類實(shí)驗(yàn)。實(shí)驗(yàn)結(jié)果可以加深人們對行為經(jīng)濟(jì)學(xué)和風(fēng)險(xiǎn)心理學(xué)的了解，同時(shí),它可能也解釋了為什么人類的經(jīng)濟(jì)會(huì)遭遇周期性的金融危機(jī)。
It involved six Capuchin monkeys named after James Bond characters.
這項(xiàng)實(shí)驗(yàn)用了6只卷尾猴，以007詹姆斯.邦德的角色命名。
Researchers trained the monkeys to exchange small metal tokens for food. They were put in a makeshift tiny market where experimenters would offer different foods at different prices.
研究人員以小型金屬代幣交換食物對這些猴子進(jìn)行了訓(xùn)練，然后安排它們到一個(gè)臨時(shí)的小市場進(jìn)行實(shí)驗(yàn)，他們會(huì)提供標(biāo)記不同價(jià)格的食物。
One of those trading with monkeys was Laurie Santos, a professor of cognitive science and psychology at Yale University. “We could use that set up to really ask, do the monkeys pay attention to things like price - are they trying to maximise their monkey token dollar?” she explains.
勞麗.桑托斯是與猴子進(jìn)行交易的人員之一，她是美國耶魯大學(xué)的認(rèn)知科學(xué)和心理學(xué)教授。她解釋說：“我們想利用這種設(shè)置來解開疑團(tuán)，猴子們會(huì)關(guān)注價(jià)格之類的東西嗎?它們會(huì)最大化利用手中的代幣嗎?”
“What we found surprising was, with very little training, the monkeys shopped at experimenters who gave them food more cheaply. So if they got twice as much food for one token with an experimenter, the monkeys shopped there more often.”
她說：“我們發(fā)現(xiàn)，令人驚奇的是，猴子雖然受了很少的訓(xùn)練，但它們購物時(shí)總是到給它們的食物較便宜的研究人員那里。因此，如果它們在某位研究人員處用一個(gè)代幣能買到兩倍多的食物，它們就會(huì)多光顧。”
The monkeys also displayed other human-like traits such as opportunism. They tried to grab any tokens that were left lying around while the scientists were not paying attention. Primates engaging in some monkey business no doubt. Nevertheless, it also showed that the monkeys considered the tokens as valuable items.
猴子還表現(xiàn)出其他類似人類的行為，例如機(jī)會(huì)主義。它們嘗試抓取科學(xué)家們留下來的一些無人看管的代幣。毋庸置疑，靈長類動(dòng)物的行為常常都是胡鬧的。不過，實(shí)驗(yàn)也證明，猴子視那些代幣為有價(jià)值的物品。
However, it is the monkeys’ attitude to risk that might hold the most intriguing lessons for us humans.
然而，正是猴子對待風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的態(tài)度，可能為人類上了最有趣的一課。
The researchers introduced an element of choice into their experiment. They could trade with one of two people. One would give them two pieces of food, grapes in this case, for their token, every time they traded. It was a no-lose, safe option.
研究人員在他們的實(shí)驗(yàn)中引入了一種選擇成分。猴子可以和兩人中的一個(gè)交易。在其中一人那里，每次交易時(shí)，代幣都可以換得兩份食物，比如說葡萄。這是一個(gè)沒有損失的，安全的選擇。
But the other gave them either one grape or three grapes, in exchange for their token. The second deal carried more risk as half the time it was one grape, the other half three.
而在另一個(gè)人那里，猴子的代幣有時(shí)可換得一份葡萄，有時(shí)是三份。這第二種交易就風(fēng)險(xiǎn)更大，因?yàn)橐环萜咸押腿萜咸训母怕矢髡家话搿?/p>
Translated into human terms, look at it like this: You have a choice, you could get a guaranteed $2000 or have a 50% chance of getting $1000 and a 50% chance of $3000.
把這個(gè)與人類的行為比對，看起來是這樣的：一種情況下，你能萬無一失的得到2000塊，另一種情況，你可能得到1000塊或是3000塊，概率分別是50%.
To gamble or not to gamble - which option would you choose?
要不要博一下——如果是你,你會(huì)怎樣選擇?
Most people will go for the safe option - they take the $2000. That is also what monkeys do.
大多數(shù)人都會(huì)做出最安全的選擇——拿走2000塊。猴子也是這樣做的。
So far so good. Apes and monkeys are, after all, our nearest animal relatives. We share a common evolutionary history. However, once the experiment was adjusted so that the monkeys had the same options but from a different starting point, something fascinating happened.
畢竟，目前來看，猿和猴子是與人類關(guān)系最親近的動(dòng)物了。我們有著共同的進(jìn)化史。然而，一旦這個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)做出調(diào)整，使開頭不同，讓猴子有著同樣的購物選擇，有趣的事就發(fā)生了。
Professor Laurie Santos explains “So the monkeys come in and it looks like both experimenters [are] kind of holding three [grapes] so this monkey brain is probably thinking ‘oh there’s a chance to get three.’ One guy is safe, he does the same thing every time...the monkey trades with this guy [and] he’s holding three but he takes one away and gives the monkeys two so it’s kind of a sure loss - a small loss but a sure one,” says Santos. “The second guy is risky - sometimes he gives the monkeys all three but sometimes he takes two away and only gives the monkeys one.”
桑托斯教授解釋說，“猴子來了，它看到兩個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)前都有三份葡萄，此時(shí)，這只猴子的大腦里很可能就在琢磨，‘噢!我有機(jī)會(huì)得到三份葡萄’，到其中一人那里去，很安全，他每次都做一樣的事——猴子與他交易，他拿走一份，剩余兩份給了猴子，所以猴子必然是損失了——小小的損失但確保了手中有吃的。”她又說，“而到第二個(gè)人那里去是有風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的——有時(shí)他把三份全給猴子，有時(shí)他拿走兩份只給猴子一份。”
Again, let’s look at that another way: You start with $3000, now you have a choice. Either you take a guaranteed loss of $1000 leaving you with only $2000 or you gamble. If you gamble half the time, you will lose $2000 leaving you with just $1000 but half the time you will not lose anything. What would you do?
再一次，讓我們換個(gè)角度來看：一開始那兒就有3000塊，現(xiàn)在你面臨一個(gè)選擇：拿走2000失去1000，還是去博一下得到全部?如果你賭一把，你有可能得到1000，失去了2000，也有可能3000全到手。你會(huì)怎么辦?
Most people will gamble and go for the riskier choice. Surprisingly, so do the monkeys. The thought of losing out is so painful that they will risk a bigger loss just for a chance of no loss.
大多數(shù)人都會(huì)賭一把，選擇風(fēng)險(xiǎn)更高的。讓人吃驚的是，猴子居然也是這么做的。損失的感受是如此痛苦，以至于他們會(huì)冒更大的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)用來止損。
When stocks and shares crash or house prices collapse, you might expect people to become more cautious. In fact, they take more risks. People will hold onto stock that is losing value, speculating the price will rise again, because we can’t bear the thought of having less than we have now. This is loss aversion.
當(dāng)股票跳水或者房價(jià)暴跌時(shí)，你可能會(huì)認(rèn)為人們會(huì)變得更加謹(jǐn)慎。事實(shí)上，他們承擔(dān)了更高的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)。人們會(huì)認(rèn)為股價(jià)會(huì)反彈起來的，從而購買正在縮水的股票，因?yàn)槲覀儫o法忍受我們將來擁有的比現(xiàn)在還少。這就是“損失規(guī)避”。
