2021 Text 4（英语二）直觉的特殊能力

We're fairly good at judging people based on first impressions, thin slices of experience ranging from a glimpse of a photo to a five-minute interaction, and deliberation can be not only extraneous but intrusive.

我们非常擅长根据第一印象判断人，从一瞥照片到五分钟互动的单薄体验，并且深思熟虑不仅可以是无关紧要的，而且可以是侵入性的。

In one study of the ability, she dubbed “thin-slicing,” the late psychologist Nalini Ambady asked participants to watch silent 10-second video clips of professors and to rate the instructor's overall effectiveness.

在一项被称为 “薄片” 的能力研究中，已故心理学家纳里尼·安巴迪要求参与者观看教授的 10 秒无声视频剪辑，并对教师的整体效率进行评分。

Their ratings correlated strongly with students' end-of-semester ratings.

他们的评分与学生的学期末评分密切相关。

Another set of participants had to count backward from 1,000 by nines as they watched the clips, occupying their conscious working memory.

另一组参与者在观看视频片段时，必须从 1000 个数字中倒数 9 个数字，占据他们有意识的工作记忆。

Their ratings were just as accurate, demonstrating the intuitive nature of the social processing.

他们的评分同样准确，显示了社会处理的直观性。

Critically, another group was asked to spend a minute writing down reasons for their judgment, before giving the rating.

最关键的是，另一组人被要求花一分钟时间写下他们判断的理由，然后再给出评价。

Accuracy dropped dramatically.

准确率急剧下降。

Ambady suspected that deliberation focused them on vivid but misleading cues, such as certain gestures or utterances, rather than letting the complex interplay of subtle signals form a holistic impression.

安巴迪怀疑他们的思考集中在生动但有误导性的线索上，如某些手势或话语，而不是让微妙信号的复杂相互作用形成一个整体印象。

She found similar interference when participants watched 15-second clips of pairs of people and judged whether they were strangers, friends, or dating partners.

当参与者观看一对人的 15 秒片段并判断他们是陌生人、朋友还是约会伙伴时，她发现了类似的干扰。

Other research shows we're better at detecting deception and sexual orientation from thin slices when we rely on intuition instead of reflection.

其他研究表明，当我们依靠直觉而不是思考时，我们更善于从薄薄的切片中发现欺骗和性取向。

“It's as if you're driving a stick shift,” says Judith Hall, a psychologist at Northeastern University, “and if you start thinking about it too much, you can't remember what you're doing.

“这就像你在驾驶一个变速杆，” 东北大学（美国）的心理学家朱迪思·霍尔说，“如果你开始考虑得太多，你就记不住你在做什么。

But if you go on automatic pilot, you're fine. Much of our social life is like that.”

但如果你进入自动驾驶状态，你就会没事。我们的大部分社会生活都是这样的。”

Thinking too much can also harm our ability to form preferences.

思考太多也会损害我们形成偏好的能力。

College students' ratings of strawberry jams and college courses aligned better with experts' opinions when the students weren't asked to analyze their rationale.

当没有要求学生分析他们的理由时，大学生对草莓酱和大学课程的评价与专家的意见更一致。

And people made car-buying decisions that were both objectively better and more personally satisfying when asked to focus on their feelings rather than on details, but only if the decision was complex — when they had a lot of information to process.

当人们被要求关注他们的感受而不是细节时，他们做出的购车决定在客观上更好，也更让人满意，但只有当决定是复杂的——当他们有大量的信息需要处理时。

Intuition's special powers are unleashed only in certain circumstances.

直觉的特殊能力只有在特定情况下才会被释放出来。

In one study, participants completed a battery of eight tasks, including four that tapped reflective thinking (discerning rules, comprehending vocabulary) and four that tapped intuition and creativity (generating new products or figures of speech) .

在一项研究中，参与者完成了八项任务，其中四项是反思性思维（辨别规则、理解词汇），四项是直觉和创造力（产出新产品或言语形象）。

Then they rated the degree to which they had used intuition ( “gut feelings,” “hunches,” “my heart” ) .

然后他们对自己使用直觉（别的叫法有 “gut feelings”、“hunches”、“my heart”）的程度进行评分。

Use of their gut hurt their performance on the first four tasks, as expected, and helped them on the rest.

正如预期的那样，使用他们的直觉会损害他们在前四项任务中的表现，而在其他任务中则有助于他们。

Sometimes the heart is smarter than the head.

有时直觉比头脑更聪明。