TED：孩子從什么時(shí)候開(kāi)始在意他人的評(píng)價(jià)
I'd like you to take a momentand consider what you are wearing right now.I have a deep, philosophical question for you.Why are we not all wearing comfortable pajamas right now?
我想請(qǐng)你花點(diǎn)時(shí)間，想想你現(xiàn)在穿的是什么衣服。我有一個(gè)深刻的哲學(xué)問(wèn)題要問(wèn)你。為什么我們現(xiàn)在都沒(méi)有穿著舒適的睡衣呢?
Well, I'm a psychologist and not a mind reader,although many people think that's the same thing.I can bet you that your response is somewhere along the lines of,"I'm expected to not wear pj's in public"or "I don't want people to think I am a slob."
我是個(gè)心理學(xué)家，但我不會(huì)讀心術(shù)，盡管很多人認(rèn)為這是一回事。我敢打賭，你的回答大概是，“我不應(yīng)該在公共場(chǎng)合穿睡衣”或“我不希望人們認(rèn)為我是個(gè)懶漢”。
Either way, the fact that we all chose to wear business casual clothing,as opposed to our favorite pair of sweatpants,is not a silly coincidence.Instead, it reveals two defining human characteristics.
無(wú)論如何，我們都選擇穿商務(wù)休閑裝的這個(gè)事實(shí)，而不是穿最喜歡的運(yùn)動(dòng)褲，這并不是一個(gè)愚蠢的巧合。相反，它揭示了人類(lèi)的兩個(gè)特征。
The first is that we are cognizant of what other people value,like what they will approve or disapprove of,such as not wearing pj's to these sorts of settings.
首先，我們知道別人看重什么，比如他們會(huì)贊成或不贊成什么，比如不穿睡衣去類(lèi)似的場(chǎng)合。
And two, we've readily used this information to guide our behavior.Unlike many other species,humans are prone to tailor their behavior in the presence of othersto garner approval.
第二，我們很容易地用這些信息來(lái)指導(dǎo)我們的行為。與許多其他物種不同，人類(lèi)傾向于在他人面前調(diào)整自己的行為，以獲得認(rèn)可。
We spend valuable time putting on make up,choosing the right picture and Instagram filter,and composing ideas that will undoubtedly change the worldin 140 characters or less.
我們花了很多寶貴的時(shí)間化妝，挑選好看的照片和Instagram濾鏡，以及分享一些無(wú)疑會(huì)改變世界的想法，使用不超過(guò)140個(gè)字符。
Clearly, our concern with how other people will evaluate usis a big part of being human.Despite this being a big human trait, however,we know relatively little about when and howwe come to care about the opinion of others.
很明顯，生活的一個(gè)重要組成部分就是在意他人如何評(píng)價(jià)我們。然而，盡管這是人類(lèi)的一大特點(diǎn)，我們對(duì)自己從何時(shí)以及如何開(kāi)始在意他人的看法卻知之甚少。
Now, this is a big question that requires many studies.But the first step to uncovering this questionis to investigate when in developmentwe become sensitive to others' evaluations.
這是一個(gè)需要很多研究的大問(wèn)題。但是揭開(kāi)這個(gè)問(wèn)題的第一步，是從逐漸成長(zhǎng)的過(guò)程中調(diào)查，我們從何時(shí)對(duì)他人的評(píng)價(jià)變得敏感。
I have spent the past four years at Emory Universityinvestigating how an infant,who has no problem walking around the grocery store in her onesie,develops into an adult that fears public speakingfor fear of being negatively judged.
過(guò)去四年里，我在埃默里大學(xué)(Emory University)研究一個(gè)嬰兒是如何從一個(gè)穿著連體衣在雜貨店里走來(lái)走去的人，成長(zhǎng)為一個(gè)因害怕負(fù)面評(píng)價(jià)，而不敢在公眾場(chǎng)合發(fā)言的成年人（就像我）。
Now, this is usually a point when people ask me,"How do you investigate this question, exactly?Infants can't talk, right?"
到這步，人們通常會(huì)問(wèn)我，“那你是如何調(diào)查這個(gè)問(wèn)題的?嬰兒不是不會(huì)說(shuō)話(huà)，對(duì)吧?”
Well, if my husband were up here right now,he would tell you that I interview babies,because he would rather not say that his wife experiments on children.
如果我丈夫現(xiàn)在在這里，他會(huì)告訴你我在采訪(fǎng)嬰兒，因?yàn)樗幌胝f(shuō)他的妻子在用孩子做實(shí)驗(yàn)。
In reality, I design experiments for children,usually in the form of games.Developmental psychologist Dr. Philippe Rochat and Idesigned a "game" called "The Robot Task"to explore when children would begin to be sensitiveto the evaluation of others.
其實(shí)，我為孩子們?cè)O(shè)計(jì)的實(shí)驗(yàn)，通常是以游戲的形式。發(fā)展心理學(xué)家菲利普·羅查特博士和我，設(shè)計(jì)了一個(gè)名為“機(jī)器人任務(wù)”的“游戲”，用以探索孩子們什么時(shí)候開(kāi)始對(duì)他人的評(píng)價(jià)變得敏感。
Specifically, the robot task captures when children, like adults,strategically modify their behavior when others are watching.
具體來(lái)說(shuō)，這個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)用來(lái)發(fā)現(xiàn)什么時(shí)候孩子們，會(huì)像成年人一樣，在別人觀看的時(shí)候戰(zhàn)略性地改變他們的行為。
To do this, we showed 14 to 24-month-old infantshow to activate a toy robot,and importantly, we either assigned a positive value,saying "Wow, isn't that great!"or a negative value, saying, "Oh, oh. Oops, oh no,"after pressing the remote.
為了做到這一點(diǎn)，我們向14到24個(gè)月大的嬰兒演示了如何激活一個(gè)玩具機(jī)器人，重要的是，我們要么給一個(gè)正反饋，說(shuō)，“哇，真棒!”要么給一個(gè)負(fù)反饋，說(shuō)，“哦，噢。天哪，不，”當(dāng)按下遙控器的時(shí)候。
Following this toy demonstration,we invited the infants to play with the remote,and then either watched themor turned around and pretended to read a magazine.
在這個(gè)玩具演示之后，我們邀請(qǐng)嬰兒玩遙控器，然后要么看著他們，要么轉(zhuǎn)過(guò)身假裝在看雜志。
The idea was that if by 24 months,children are indeed sensitive to the evaluation of others,then their button-pressing behavior should be influencednot only by whether or not they're being watchedbut also by the values that the experimenter expressedtowards pressing the remote.
這個(gè)想法是，如果在24個(gè)月大的時(shí)候，孩子們確實(shí)對(duì)他人的評(píng)價(jià)敏感，那么他們按按鈕的行為不僅會(huì)受到是否被觀察的影響，還會(huì)受到實(shí)驗(yàn)者對(duì)按遙控器所表達(dá)的反饋的影響。
So for example,we would expect children to play with the positive remote significantly moreif they were being observedbut then choose to explore the negative remoteonce no one was watching.
例如，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)孩子們?cè)诒挥^察的情況下玩積極的遙控器玩得更多，但是一旦沒(méi)有人看，他們就會(huì)選擇探索消極的遙控器。
To really capture this phenomenon, we did three variations of the study.Study one explored how infants would engage with a novel toyif there were no values or instructions provided.
為了深入了解這一現(xiàn)象，我們?cè)O(shè)計(jì)了三種不同的條件。第一項(xiàng)研究探討了如果沒(méi)有反饋或指令，嬰兒將如何嘗試新玩具。
So we simply showed infants how to activate the toy robot,but didn't assign any values,and we also didn't tell them that they could play with the remote,providing them with a really ambiguous situation.
我們只是簡(jiǎn)單地向嬰兒展示如何激活玩具機(jī)器人，但沒(méi)有給他們?nèi)魏畏答仯覀円矝](méi)有告訴他們可以玩遙控器，這給他們提供了一個(gè)非常模糊的情況。
In study two,we incorporated the two values, a positive and a negative.And in the last study, we had two experimenters and one remote.
第二項(xiàng)研究中，我們將兩個(gè)反饋放在一起測(cè)試，一個(gè)是正的，一個(gè)是負(fù)的。在最后一項(xiàng)研究中，我們有兩個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)者和一個(gè)遙控器。
One experimenter expressed a negative value towards pressing the remote,saying, "Yuck, the toy moved,"while the other experimenter expressed a positive value, saying,"Yay, the toy moved."
一名實(shí)驗(yàn)者對(duì)按遙控器的行為表現(xiàn)出消極，說(shuō)：“哎呀，玩具動(dòng)了”。而另一名實(shí)驗(yàn)者則表現(xiàn)出積極的反饋，說(shuō)，“耶，玩具動(dòng)了”。
And this is how the children reacted to these three different scenarios.So in study one, the ambiguous situation,I'm currently watching the child.
以下是孩子們對(duì)這三個(gè)不同的場(chǎng)景的反應(yīng)。在研究一，在這個(gè)模糊不清的情境中，我正在觀察這個(gè)孩子。
She doesn't seem to be too interested in pressing the remote.Once I turned around --now she's ready to play.
她似乎對(duì)按遙控器不太感興趣。我一轉(zhuǎn)身，她就準(zhǔn)備好要去按遙控器了。
Currently, I'm not watching the child.She's really focused.I turn around.She wasn't doing anything, right?
目前，我沒(méi)有在注視這個(gè)孩子。她真的很專(zhuān)注。我轉(zhuǎn)過(guò)身來(lái)了。她什么都沒(méi)做，對(duì)吧?
In study two, it's the two remotes,one with the positive and one with the negative value.I'm currently observing the child.And the orange remote is a negative remote.She's just looking around, looking at me, hanging out.Then I turn around ...
在研究二中，是兩個(gè)遙控器，一個(gè)帶著積極的評(píng)價(jià)，一個(gè)帶著消極的評(píng)價(jià)。我正在觀察這個(gè)孩子。橙色的遙控器是消極的。她只是環(huán)顧四周，看著我，在外面閑逛。然后我轉(zhuǎn)身……
That's what she's going for.I'm not watching the child.He wants the mom to play with it, right?Take a safer route.I turn around ...
這就是她想要的。我沒(méi)在看孩子。他想讓媽媽陪他玩，對(duì)吧?真是安全的選擇。我回頭……
He wasn't doing anything, either.Yeah, he feels awkward.Everyone knows that side-eyed glance, right?
他也什么都沒(méi)做。是啊，他覺(jué)得很尷尬。每個(gè)人都看到那側(cè)眼一瞥，對(duì)吧?
Study three, the two experimenters, one remote.The experimenter that reacted negatively towards pressing the remoteis watching the child right now.She feels a little awkward, doesn't know what to do, relying on Mom.
研究三，兩個(gè)實(shí)驗(yàn)者和一個(gè)遙控器。實(shí)驗(yàn)者看著孩子時(shí)，對(duì)按遙控器表現(xiàn)出消極的態(tài)度。她覺(jué)得有點(diǎn)尷尬，不知道該怎么辦，全靠媽媽。
And then, she's going to turn aroundso that the experimenter that expressed a positive response is watching.Coast is clear -- now she's ready to play.
然后，她會(huì)轉(zhuǎn)過(guò)身來(lái)讓表現(xiàn)出積極反應(yīng)的實(shí)驗(yàn)者看著她。危險(xiǎn)已經(jīng)過(guò)去——現(xiàn)在她準(zhǔn)備好要玩了。
So, as the data suggests,we found that children's button-pressing behaviorwas indeed influenced by the values and the instructions of the experimenter.
因此，正如數(shù)據(jù)顯示的那樣，我們發(fā)現(xiàn)孩子們按按鈕的行為確實(shí)受到了實(shí)驗(yàn)者的反饋和指示的影響。
Because in study one, children did not knowwhat would be positively or negatively evaluated,they tended to take the safest routeand wait until I turned my back to press the remote.
因?yàn)樵诘谝豁?xiàng)研究中，孩子們不知道什么是正面評(píng)價(jià)，什么是負(fù)面評(píng)價(jià)，他們傾向于選擇最安全的路徑，他們等到我轉(zhuǎn)過(guò)身再去按遙控器。
Children in study twochose to press the positive remote significantly more when I was watching,but then once I turned my back,they immediately took the negative remote and started playing with it.
研究二的孩子們，在我看著的時(shí)候，明顯更愿意按積極的遙控器，但當(dāng)我一轉(zhuǎn)身，他們立刻拿起消極的遙控器開(kāi)始玩。
Importantly, in a control study,where we removed the different values of the remotes --so we simply said, "Oh, wow" after pressing either of the remotes --children's button-pressing behavior no longer differed across conditions,
重要的是，在一項(xiàng)對(duì)照研究中，我們把遙控器不同的反饋統(tǒng)統(tǒng)去掉, ——按遙控器后我們簡(jiǎn)單地說(shuō)，“噢，哇” ——兒童按按鈕行為不再在各種條件下發(fā)生變化，
suggesting that it was really the values that we gave the two remotesthat drove the behavior in the previous study.
這表明在之前的研究中，影響兒童行為的確實(shí)是我們給的兩個(gè)遙控器所設(shè)定的反饋值。
Last but not least,children in study three chose to press a remote significantly morewhen the experimenter that expressed a positive value was watching,as opposed to the experimenter that had expressed a negative value.
最后但很重要的一點(diǎn)是，研究三的孩子們?cè)诳吹奖憩F(xiàn)出積極價(jià)值的實(shí)驗(yàn)者和表現(xiàn)出消極價(jià)值的實(shí)驗(yàn)者時(shí)，會(huì)明顯地更多地按遙控器。
Not coincidentally,it is also around this age that children begin to show embarrassmentin situations that might elicit a negative evaluation,
并非巧合的是，也正是在這個(gè)年齡，孩子們開(kāi)始在可能引發(fā)負(fù)面評(píng)價(jià)的情況下表現(xiàn)出尷尬，
such as looking at themselves in the mirrorand noticing a mark on their nose.The equivalent of finding spinach in your teeth, for adults.
比如看著鏡子里的自己，注意到自己鼻子上的一個(gè)標(biāo)記。對(duì)成年人來(lái)說(shuō)，這相當(dāng)于在牙齒里發(fā)現(xiàn)菠菜。
So what can we say, based on these findings?Besides the fact that babies are actually really, really sneaky.
基于這些發(fā)現(xiàn)，我們能說(shuō)些什么呢?除了嬰兒實(shí)際上非常狡猾之外？
From very early on, children, like adults,are sensitive to the values that we place on objects and behaviors.And importantly, they use these values to guide their behavior.
從很小的時(shí)候起，孩子就像成年人一樣，對(duì)我們對(duì)物體和行為的反饋很敏感。重要的是，他們用這些反饋來(lái)指導(dǎo)他們的行為。
Whether we're aware of it or not,we're constantly communicating values to those around us.Now, I don't mean values like "be kind" or "don't steal,"although those are certainly values.
無(wú)論我們意識(shí)到與否，我們都在不斷地與周?chē)娜私涣饔^念。我并不是說(shuō)“善良”或“不偷竊”之類(lèi)的想法，盡管這些確實(shí)是價(jià)值觀。
I mean that we are constantly showing others, specifically our children,what is likeable, valuable and praiseworthy, and what is not.
我的意思是，我們不斷地向他人，尤其是我們的孩子，展示什么是可愛(ài)的、有價(jià)值的、值得稱(chēng)贊的，或者什么不是。
And a lot of the times,we actually do this without even noticing it.Psychologists study behavior to explore the contents of the mind,because our behavior often reflects our beliefs,our values and our desires.
很多時(shí)候，我們這樣做時(shí)，甚至都沒(méi)有注意到。心理學(xué)家研究行為是為了探索內(nèi)心，因?yàn)槲覀兊男袨橥从沉宋覀兊男拍?、價(jià)值觀和我們的期望。
Here in Atlanta, we all believe the same thing.That Coke is better than Pepsi.
在亞特蘭大，我們都相信同樣的事情?？煽诳蓸?lè)比百事可樂(lè)好。
Now, this might have to do with the fact that Coke was invented in Atlanta.But regardless,this belief is expressed in the fact that most people will chose to drink Coke.
這可能與可口可樂(lè)誕生于亞特蘭大有關(guān)。但無(wú)論如何，大多數(shù)人會(huì)選擇喝可樂(lè)這一事實(shí)表明了這一信念。
In the same way,we are communicating a valuewhen we mostly complement girlsfor their pretty hair or their pretty dress,but boys, for their intelligence.
同樣地，當(dāng)我們贊美女孩時(shí)，大多數(shù)時(shí)候我們會(huì)贊美她們漂亮的發(fā)型或裙子，我們也在傳達(dá)一種價(jià)值觀，但是贊美男孩時(shí)卻會(huì)稱(chēng)贊他們的聰明才智。
Or when we chose to offer candy, as opposed to nutritious food,as a reward for good behavior.Adults and children are incredibly effectiveat picking up values from these subtle behaviors.And in turn, this ends up shaping their own behavior.
或者當(dāng)我們選擇用糖果，而不是有營(yíng)養(yǎng)的食物作為表現(xiàn)好時(shí)的獎(jiǎng)勵(lì)。成年人和兒童都能非常有效地從這些細(xì)微的行為中獲取其中的觀念。反過(guò)來(lái)，這最終塑造了他們自己的行為。
The research I have shared with you todaysuggests that this ability emerges very early in development,before we can even utter a complete sentenceor are even potty-trained.And it becomes an integral part of who we grow up to be.
今天我和大家分享的研究表明，表面這種能力在我們成長(zhǎng)的早期就形成了，早在我們還沒(méi)能說(shuō)出一個(gè)完整的句子之前，甚至在我們還沒(méi)受過(guò)上廁所的訓(xùn)練之前，它成為我們成長(zhǎng)過(guò)程中不可或缺的一部分。
So before I go,I'd like to invite you to contemplate on the valuesthat we broadcast in day-to-day interactions,and how these values might be shaping the behavior of those around you.
在我結(jié)束之前，我想請(qǐng)你們思考一下，我們?cè)谌粘＝涣髦袘?yīng)用的價(jià)值觀，以及這些價(jià)值觀是如何塑造你周?chē)说男袨榈摹?/p>
For example, what value is being broadcastedwhen we spend more time smiling at our phonethan smiling with other people?
例如，當(dāng)我們花更多的時(shí)間對(duì)著手機(jī)傻笑，而不是對(duì)別人微笑時(shí)，我們?cè)趥鞑ピ鯓拥膬r(jià)值取向?
Likewise, consider how your own behavior has been shaped by those around you,in ways you might not have considered before.
同樣，考慮一下你自己的行為是如何被你周?chē)娜怂茉斓?，以你以前可能沒(méi)有考慮過(guò)的方式。
To go back to our simple illustration,do you really prefer Coke over Pepsi?Or was this preference simply driven by what others aroundyou valued?Parents and teachers certainly have the privilegeto shape children's behavior.
回到我們簡(jiǎn)單的例子，相比百事可樂(lè)，你真的更喜歡可口可樂(lè)嗎?或者這種偏好僅僅是因?yàn)榕匀说挠^點(diǎn)對(duì)你的影響?父母和老師當(dāng)然有權(quán)去塑造孩子們的行為。
But it is important to rememberthat through the values we convey in simple day-to-day interactions,we all have the power to shape the behavior of those around us.
但重要的是要記住，通過(guò)我們?cè)谌粘：?jiǎn)單互動(dòng)中傳達(dá)的價(jià)值觀，都能潛移默化地影響你身邊人的行為。
Thank you.
謝謝大家！
- 頻道推薦
- |
- 全站推薦
- 推薦下載
- 網(wǎng)站推薦
