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
46
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、Theyaredelightedbecausetheycanenjoythescenerywhiledriving.B、Theyarefrightenedbecausetrafficaccidentsarefrequ
A、BecausetheEarthisheavilypolluted.B、Becausenaturecannotrecycleitsresources.C、Becausemoreandmorepeopleliveont
A、TheygotsuccesswiththetrackParkLife.B、TheyweredefeatedbyOasis.C、Theyweretheroughworkingclassrockers.D、They
A、Becausetheyweredrivenbysteampower.B、Becausetheydidtheworkanimalsusedtodo.C、Becausetheypulledcarsfullofco
A、Tomhaschangedhiscellphonenumber.B、Thewoman’scellphoneisalwaysunreachable.C、Tomwillteachhistoryclassatthat
A、TotalkaboutDanielHaleWilliams’life.B、Toshowhowracialdiscriminationwas.C、ToshowhowanAfricanAmericanpaidoff.
A、Heoftenskipsclassestoplaybasketball.B、Hehasnochancetoplaybasketball.C、He’slookingforsomebodytoplaywithhim
GoodandHungryFast-foodfirmshavetobeathick-skinnedbunch.Healthexpertsregularlylambast(抨击)themforpeddling(售卖
GoodandHungryFast-foodfirmshavetobeathick-skinnedbunch.Healthexpertsregularlylambast(抨击)themforpeddling(售卖
Lookinginfromabroad,muchoftheworldhashistoricallybeenbaffledbyAmerica’sgunlaws.Innoothercountrycanamentall
随机试题
20世纪50年代,毛泽东指出,中国工业化道路中最重要的问题是()
下列属于Calot三角边界的是
患者男,40岁。因右侧胫骨平台骨折手术切开复位,螺钉内固定术,功能位石膏外固定4周后,拆除石膏后,发现右膝僵硬,要求康复治疗。导致膝关节屈曲受限的原因中,描述错误的是
患儿,1岁,能抬头,不能独坐及站立,牙齿萌出4颗,头颅呈方形,卤门宽大,发稀而黄,目无神采,反应迟钝,夜卧不安,易倦懒动,肢体无力,睡眠不实,面色不华,形体瘦弱,舌淡苔少,指纹淡。治疗应首选
小区王某等住户因车位问题与该小区的开发商B公司发生争议。B公司与王某等住户的购房合同规定:B公司将为本楼住户提供地下停车场的停车车位。但王某等住户搬进小区后,发现B公司已将该楼50多套房连同地下停车场卖给了C公司。C公司明确表示,地下停车场的车位仅供本楼本
MRP系统最主要的目标是确定()的需求量。
生活也许______不了苦难,却从来不会拒绝一朵萝卜花的盛开。在女人一朵一朵细细的______里,有对生活的尊重,还有一种信念,那就是:美好,就在不远处,就在手底下。填入横线部分最恰当的一项是()。
网页的强大之处在于(),它能将Intemet中的信息有机地组织起来,使我们可以进行选择性浏览。
阅读以下说明,回答问题1~问题3,将解答填入对应的答案栏内。【说明】随着网络应用的日益广泛,接入网络和边缘网络的需求也更加复杂多样,企业为了开展电子商务,必须实现与Internet的互联,路由器是实现这一互联的关键设备,路由器可以为企业
以下哪一项不属于软件易用性测试关注的范畴?______。
最新回复
(
0
)