首页
外语
计算机
考研
公务员
职业资格
财经
工程
司法
医学
专升本
自考
实用职业技能
登录
外语
Choice blindness: You don’t know what you want [A]We have all heard of experts who fail basic tests of sensory discrimination in
Choice blindness: You don’t know what you want [A]We have all heard of experts who fail basic tests of sensory discrimination in
admin
2013-11-11
42
问题
Choice blindness: You don’t know what you want
[A]We have all heard of experts who fail basic tests of sensory discrimination in their own field: wine snobs(自命不凡的人)who can’t tell red from white wine(though in blackened cups), or art critics who see deep meaning in random lines drawn by a computer. We delight in such stories since anyone claiming to be an authority is fair game. But what if we shine the spotlight on choices we make about everyday things? Experts might be forgiven for being wrong about the limits of their skills as experts, but could we be forgiven for being wrong about the limits of our skills as experts on ourselves?
[B]We have been trying to answer this question using techniques from magic performances. Rather than playing tricks with alternatives presented to participants, we secretly altered the outcomes of their choices, and recorded how they react. For example, in an early study we showed our volunteers pairs of pictures of faces and asked them to choose the most attractive. In some trials, immediately after they made their choice, we asked people to explain the reasons behind their choices.
[C]Unknown to them, we sometimes used a double-card magic trick to secretly exchange one face for the other so they ended up with the face they did not choose. Common sense dictates that all of us would notice such a big change in the outcome of a choice. But the result showed that in 75 per cent of the trials our participants were blind to the mismatch, even offering "reasons" for their "choice".
[D]We called this effect "choice blindness", echoing change blindness, the phenomenon identified by psychologists where a remarkably large number of people fail to spot a major change in their environment. Recall the famous experiments where X asks Y for directions; while Y is struggling to help, X is switched for Z — and Y fails to notice. Researchers are still pondering the full implications, but it does show how little information we use in daily life, and undermines the idea that we know what is going on around us.
[E]When we set out, we aimed to weigh in on the enduring, complicated debate about self-knowledge and intentionality. For all the intimate familiarity we feel we have with decision-making, it is very difficult to know about it from the "inside": one of the great barriers for scientific research is the nature of subjectivity.
[F]As anyone who has ever been in a verbal disagreement can prove, people tend to give elaborate justifications for their decisions, which we have every reason to believe are nothing more than rationalisations(文过饰非)after the event. To prove such people wrong, though, or even provide enough evidence to change their mind, is an entirely different matter: who are you to say what my reasons are?
[G]But with choice blindness we drive a large wedge between intentions and actions in the mind. As our participants give us verbal explanations about choices they never made, we can show them beyond doubt — and prove it — that what they say cannot be true. So our experiments offer a unique window into confabulation(虚构)(the story-telling we do to justify things after the fact)that is otherwise very difficult to come by. We can compare everyday explanations with those under lab conditions, looking for such things as the amount of detail in descriptions, how coherent the narrative is, the emotional tone, or even the timing or flow of the speech. Then we can create a theoretical framework to analyse any kind of exchange.
[H]This framework could provide a clinical use for choice blindness: for example, two of our ongoing studies examine how malingering(装病)might develop into true symptoms, and how confabulation might play a role in obsessive-compulsive disorder(强迫症).
[I]Importantly, the effects of choice blindness go beyond snap judgments. Depending on what our volunteers say in response to the mismatched outcomes of choices(whether they give short or long explanations, give numerical rating or labelling, and so on)we found this interaction could change their future preferences to the extent that they come to prefer the previously rejected alternative. This gives us a rare glimpse into the complicated dynamics of self-feedback("I chose this, I publicly said so, therefore I must like it"), which we suspect lies behind the formation of many everyday preferences.
[J]We also want to explore the boundaries of choice blindness. Of course, it will be limited by choices we know to be of great importance in everyday life. Which bride or bridegroom would fail to notice if someone switched their partner at the altar through amazing sleight of hand(巧妙的手段)? Yet there is ample territory between the absurd idea of spouse-swapping, and the results of our early face experiments.
[K]For example, in one recent study we invited supermarket customers to choose between two paired varieties of jam and tea. In order to switch each participant’s choice without them noticing, we created two sets of "magical" jars, with lids at both ends and a divider inside. The jars looked normal, but were designed to hold one variety of jam or tea at each end, and could easily be flipped over.
[L]Immediately after the participants chose, we asked them to taste their choice again and tell us verbally why they made that choice. Before they did, we turned over the sample containers, so the tasters were given the opposite of what they had intended in their selection. Strikingly, people detected no more than a third of all these trick trials. Even when we switched such remarkably different flavors as spicy cinnamon and apple for bitter grapefruit jam, the participants spotted less than half of all switches.
[M]We have also documented this kind of effect when we simulate online shopping for consumer products such as laptops or cellphones, and even apartments. Our latest tests are exploring moral and political decisions, a domain where reflection and deliberation are supposed to play a central role, but which we believe is perfectly suited to investigating using choice blindness.
[N]Throughout our experiments, as well as registering whether our volunteers noticed that they had been presented with the alternative they did not choose, we also quizzed them about their beliefs about their decision processes. How did they think they would feel if they had been exposed to a study like ours? Did they think they would have noticed the switches? Consistently, between 80 and 90 per cent of people said that they believed they would have noticed something was wrong.
[O]Imagine their surprise, even disbelief, when we told them about the nature of the experiments. In everyday decisionmaking we do see ourselves as knowing a lot about our selves, but like the wine buff or art critic, we often overstate what we know. The good news is that this form of decision snobbery should not be too difficult to treat. Indeed, after reading this article you might already be cured.
The result of the face choosing experiments showed that most participants didn’t realize that their choices had been switched.
选项
答案
C
解析
根据题干中的线索词The result,showed that most participants和their choices将本题出处定位于[C]段末句。该句提到的the mismatch指代第1句说的exchange one face for the other so they ended up with the face theydid not choose。题干中的the result…reveal是对该句提到的the result showed的同义转述,most与75 per cent对应,didn’t realize that their choices had been switched与were blind to the mismatch对应。
转载请注明原文地址:https://kaotiyun.com/show/Zi27777K
0
大学英语六级
相关试题推荐
A、BecausetheEarthisheavilypolluted.B、Becausenaturecannotrecycleitsresources.C、Becausemoreandmorepeopleliveont
A、Becausemanyyoungpeoplehavemovedintocomfortableapartments.B、Becausemanyoldhousesinthepoorareaofthetownaren
A、Becausetheycan’taffordto.B、Becausetheythinksmallhousesaremorecomfortabletolivein.C、Becausebighousesareusua
A、Theyaregratefulstudents.B、Theyare"brains".C、Theyarehard-workingstudents.D、Theyarefunpeople.A女士说组织者都是些感恩的学生,并不是“
A、Itisconsideredtobepartofthesecondaryeducation.B、Itisgiventoanyonewantingtogetadriver’slicense.C、Itiscar
A、ShemistookthemanforCarlSmith.B、Sheraisedtheman’spaybymistake.C、Shepraisedthewrongperson.D、Shealmostfired
Everypersonhasadreamofhowtheywouldlivetheirlifeifhedidnothavetospendalargeamountofhistimeworking.Most
A、Thespecialeffectsarebetterthantheacting.B、Boththespecialeffectsandtheactingareterrific.C、Shelikestheacting
A、Bossandemployee.B、Teacherandstudent.C、Interviewerandcandidate.D、Colleagues.C人物身份关系题。浏览选项可知,此题是考查对话者之间的关系。文中多处出现了诸如cu
A、Shearrivedatthetheaterlate.B、Shelefthiswatchinthetheater.C、Shelikedlookingathiswatch.D、Shedidnotenjoyth
随机试题
在考生文件夹下有一个数据库文件“samp3.accdb”,里面已经设计了表对象“tEmp”、窗体对象“fEmp”、报表对象“rEmp”和宏对象“mEmp”。请在此基础上按照以下要求补充设计:设置表对象“tEmp”中“聘用时间”字段的有效性规则为:200
甲携带乙厂盖有合同专用章的空白合同,以乙厂的名义与丙厂签订买卖冰箱合同一份,货物运抵后,乙厂以甲并非自己的业务员为由拒付货款。甲的行为属于【】
病人头晕、乏力、恶心呕吐、血清钠130mmol/L、血清钾4.5mmol/L,尿比重1.010,是
A.发病急剧,疼痛剧烈,压痛部位较深,表面红肿不明显B.压痛部位浅,局部炎性表现明显C.疼痛部位在关节,浅表关节早期可出现肿胀,多为游走性关节疼痛D.发病缓慢,很少出现红肿和穿破骨皮质,X线可见多量骨质增生E.X线片表现为干骺端囊性变,周围有硬化骨
关于心脏压塞的体征,错误的是
A.平胃散B.黄连解毒汤C.茵陈蒿汤D.白虎汤E.犀角地黄汤治疗阳明经证或气分实热选()。
毕欧特氏呼吸的特点是
男,65岁。运动时胸痛1年,症状每于重体力劳动时发生,停止活动后3分钟左右自行缓解,改善其预后的治疗措施是
下列选项中属于渗出液特点的是
假设图5—8—6所示三个受压结构失稳时临界压力分别为Pcra、Pcrb、Pcrc,比较三者的大小,则()。
最新回复
(
0
)