about predictable irrationality.

那些預知的非理性

And my interest in irrational behavior

我對非理性的行為態度產生興趣

started many years ago in the hospital.

從很多年以前開始，在一個醫院裏

I was burned very badly.

當時我嚴重燒傷

And if you spend a lot of time in hospital,

如果你在醫院裏待了很長時間

you'll see a lot of types of irrationalities.

你將會看見許多不同類型的荒謬

And the one that particularly bothered me in the burn department

在醫院的燒燙傷部門讓我最難以接受的荒謬

was the process by which the nurses took the bandage off me.

發生在護士為我拆除繃帶的時候

Now, you must have all taken a Band-Aid off at some point,

每個人應該都有使用OK繃的經驗

and you must have wondered what's the right approach.

你也應該想過怎樣撕掉才是最好的

Do you rip it off quickly -- short duration but high intensity --

你是瞬間撕開 － 時間短但很痛

or do you take your Band-Aid off slowly --

還是慢慢地把它撕掉

you take a long time, but each second is not as painful --

雖然時間長，但感覺不這麼痛

which one of those is the right approach?

哪一種才是比較好的方式？

The nurses in my department thought that the right approach

當時在我部門的護士認為一次快速的撕開才是正確的

was the ripping one, so they would grab hold and they would rip,

她們緊抓，然後撕開

and they would grab hold and they would rip.

然後再緊抓，再撕開

And because I had 70 percent of my body burned, it would take about an hour.

當時我身體有百分之七十的燒傷，整個過程要一個小時

And as you can imagine,

你可以想像

I hated that moment of ripping with incredible intensity.

我非常痛恨撕開繃帶 極端痛苦的那刻

And I would try to reason with them and say,

我努力地想和她們講理

"Why don't we try something else?

“我們不能試試其他方法嗎？

Why don't we take it a little longer --

我們不能花長一點的時間

maybe two hours instead of an hour -- and have less of this intensity?"

或許兩個小時 － 讓痛苦不要這麼強烈？"

And the nurses told me two things.

護士告訴我兩件事

They told me that they had the right model of the patient --

她們告訴我她們知道什麼對患者是最好的

that they knew what was the right thing to do to minimize my pain --

她們知道如何減低我的痛苦

and they also told me that the word patient doesn't mean

並且患者這個詞的意思

to make suggestions or to interfere or ...

不包括”提出建議”或“嘗試干涉”

This is not just in Hebrew, by the way.

不只在希伯來文是如此

It's in every language I've had experience with so far.

幾乎我目前遇見的所有語言都是如此

And, you know, there's not much -- there wasn't much I could do,

於是我無能為力

and they kept on doing what they were doing.

她們繼續她們的方法

And about three years later, when I left the hospital,

三年後，當我離開醫院時

I started studying at the university.

我開始在大學做研究

And one of the most interesting lessons I learned

我在學校裏學的最有趣的事情是

was that there is an experimental method

“實驗法”的存在

that if you have a question you can create a replica of this question

你可以靠複製經驗 來嘗試找出解答

in some abstract way, and you can try to examine this question,

抽象地說，你可以試著檢驗你的問題

maybe learn something about the world.

以嘗試瞭解這個世界上的事情

So that's what I did.

於是我就這麼做了

I was still interested

我仍然對

in this question of how do you take bandages off burn patients.

如何撕開患者身上的繃帶這個問題很有興趣

So originally I didn't have much money,

剛開始我沒有什麼資金

so I went to a hardware store and I bought a carpenter's vice.

我去五金行買了一個木匠用的老虎鉗

And I would bring people to the lab and I would put their finger in it,

我把那些來到實驗室的人的手指放到裏面

and I would crunch it a little bit.

然後“嘎吱”一下

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

And I would crunch it for long periods and short periods,

我會用較長的時間或較短的時間擠壓

and pain that went up and pain that went down,

那些較為嚴重的痛 和較輕微的痛

and with breaks and without breaks -- all kinds of versions of pain.

有休息的 和沒有休息的 － 許多不同種類的痛

And when I finished hurting people a little bit, I would ask them,

當我結束傷害他們的時候，我會問

so, how painful was this? Or, how painful was this?

這樣有多痛？那樣又有多痛？

Or, if you had to choose between the last two,

如果你可以從中選擇一種的話

which one would you choose?

你會選擇哪一種？

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

I kept on doing this for a while.

我這麼做了一陣子

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

And then, like all good academic projects, I got more funding.

就像所有優秀的學術研究一樣，我有更多資金

I moved to sounds, electrical shocks --

我開始加入聲波，電擊

I even had a pain suit that I could get people to feel much more pain.

我甚至製作了一件“疼痛服”讓人們能感受到更多痛楚

But at the end of this process,

但在研究結束後

what I learned was that the nurses were wrong.

我發覺護士們是錯的

Here were wonderful people with good intentions

雖然她們都是善良的人

and plenty of experience, and nevertheless

經驗豐富，但就算如此

they were getting things wrong predictably all the time.

她們的觀念仍然是錯誤的

It turns out that because we don't encode duration

因為在我們測量痛楚時

in the way that we encode intensity,

我們並沒有考慮到延續性

I would have had less pain if the duration would have been longer

如果把時間拉長

and the intensity was lower.

我的痛楚就會減低

It turns out it would have been better to start with my face,

最好的方法是從最痛的臉部開始

which was much more painful, and move toward my legs,

再逐漸地往腿部下移

giving me a trend of improvement over time --

讓我有一種逐漸減緩的感覺

that would have been also less painful.

這樣也能減低我的痛苦

And it also turns out that it would have been good

如果我可以在過程中稍作休息

to give me breaks in the middle to kind of recuperate from the pain.

讓我有一些時間從痛楚中恢復

All of these would have been great things to do,

這所有的方法都能改善我當時的情況

and my nurses had no idea.

但這些護士卻毫無所悉

And from that point on I started thinking,

從那時我開始想

are the nurses the only people in the world who get things wrong

這些護士是全世界唯一有這種錯誤認知的人

in this particular decision, or is it a more general case?

在這件特別的事情上，還是這其實是一種普遍現象？

And it turns out it's a more general case --

於是我發現 其實這是一個普遍現象

there's a lot of mistakes we do.

我們時常犯下這樣的錯誤

And I want to give you one example of one of these irrationalities,

在這裏我想以作弊作為例子

and I want to talk to you about cheating.

來討論這些非理性

And the reason I picked cheating is because it's interesting,

我選擇作弊的原因是因為它很有趣

but also it tells us something, I think,

也因為它也為我們現在股市的現狀

about the stock market situation we're in.

提供了一些線索

So, my interest in cheating started

我對作弊的興趣從

when Enron came on the scene, exploded all of a sudden,

美國安隆公司突然爆發醜聞開始

and I started thinking about what is happening here.

我開始思考究竟發生了什麼事

Is it the case that there was kind of

難道這是來自一些

a few apples who are capable of doing these things,

害群之馬才能犯下的例子

or are we talking a more endemic situation,

還是一種地方性的現象

that many people are actually capable of behaving this way?

許多人都抱持著這樣的態度？

So, like we usually do, I decided to do a simple experiment.

於是，我們決定故技重施，進行一些簡單的試驗

And here's how it went.

我們是這樣做的

If you were in the experiment, I would pass you a sheet of paper

如果你參加了這個實驗，我會給你一張紙

with 20 simple math problems that everybody could solve,

上面有二十個人人能解決的簡單數學問題

but I wouldn't give you enough time.

但我不會給你足夠的時間

When the five minutes were over, I would say,

當五分鐘到了以後，我會說

"Pass me the sheets of paper, and I'll pay you a dollar per question."

“把紙交給我，答對一題我就給你一塊錢。”

People did this. I would pay people four dollars for their task --

人們這麼做了。我付他們四塊

on average people would solve four problems.

平均來說，人可以解決四個問題

Other people I would tempt to cheat.

我嘗試引誘其中一些人作弊

I would pass their sheet of paper.

我會給他們一張紙

When the five minutes were over, I would say,

五分鐘到了以後，我會說

"Please shred the piece of paper.

“請將那張紙撕碎

Put the little pieces in your pocket or in your backpack,

把碎片放在口袋或是背包裏，

and tell me how many questions you got correctly."

然後告訴我你答對了幾題。”

People now solved seven questions on average.

平均突然從四題變成了七題

Now, it wasn't as if there was a few bad apples --

不是有幾個害群之馬 --

a few people cheated a lot.

換句話說，一小群人作很大的弊

Instead, what we saw is a lot of people who cheat a little bit.

而是一大群人作一些小弊

Now, in economic theory,

在經濟學理論上

cheating is a very simple cost-benefit analysis.

作弊是一種非常簡單的成本效益分析

You say, what's the probability of being caught?

被抓到的可能性有多高？

How much do I stand to gain from cheating?

我作弊的好處有多少？

And how much punishment would I get if I get caught?

被抓到會有怎樣的懲罰？

And you weigh these options out --

你衡量這些選項

you do the simple cost-benefit analysis,

一個簡單的成本效益分析

and you decide whether it's worthwhile to commit the crime or not.

然後決定是否值得犯下罪行

So, we try to test this.

我們對此進行一些測驗

For some people, we varied how much money they could get away with --

我們開始給他們不同數目的金錢

how much money they could steal.

他們所能偷竊的數目

We paid them 10 cents per correct question, 50 cents,

我們給他們十分錢，五十分

a dollar, five dollars, 10 dollars per correct question.

一塊錢，五塊錢，到十塊錢一個問題

You would expect that as the amount of money on the table increases,

你預估當桌上的錢增多時

people would cheat more, but in fact it wasn't the case.

人們也更願意作弊。但事實上卻不是

We got a lot of people cheating by stealing by a little bit.

仍有許多人為了很少的金錢作弊

What about the probability of being caught?

那難道是被抓到的可能性嗎？

Some people shredded half the sheet of paper,

有些人只撕了半張紙

so there was some evidence left.

還有些證據留下

Some people shredded the whole sheet of paper.

有些人撕碎了整張紙

Some people shredded everything, went out of the room,

有些人徹底撕碎了全部，走出房間

and paid themselves from the bowl of money that had over 100 dollars.

然後從放有超過百元美金的碗裏拿走錢

You would expect that as the probability of being caught goes down,

你會預估當被抓的可能性降低

people would cheat more, but again, this was not the case.

人們作弊的幾率便會提升，但卻不是如此

Again, a lot of people cheated by just by a little bit,

又一次地，許多人作了一些小弊

and they were insensitive to these economic incentives.

人們並沒被這些經濟學所說的誘因影響

So we said, "If people are not sensitive

我們想“如果這些符合經濟學邏輯的解答

to the economic rational theory explanations, to these forces,

這些原因，對人們不造成影響

what could be going on?"

那麼究竟發生了什麼事？”

And we thought maybe what is happening is that there are two forces.

於是我們想，或許有兩種力量

At one hand, we all want to look at ourselves in the mirror

一方面，我們都有自省的能力

and feel good about ourselves, so we don't want to cheat.

都希望對自己感覺良好，所以我們不想作弊

On the other hand, we can cheat a little bit,

另一方面，我們作一點小弊

and still feel good about ourselves.

在還能對自己感覺良好的範圍裏

So, maybe what is happening is that

所以或許

there's a level of cheating we can't go over,

我們心中有一種不能跨越的尺度

but we can still benefit from cheating at a low degree,

但我們仍然能從一些小奸小惡中獲利

as long as it doesn't change our impressions about ourselves.

只要不要讓我們自己感到不齒

We call this like a personal fudge factor.

我們說這叫“自我蒙混因素”

Now, how would you test a personal fudge factor?

但我們該如何測試自我蒙混因素呢？

Initially we said, what can we do to shrink the fudge factor?

剛開始我們說，我們該怎麼做來降低蒙混因素呢？

So, we got people to the lab, and we said,

當人們進入實驗室時，我們說

"We have two tasks for you today."

“今日我們要給你兩個任務。”

First, we asked half the people

第一，我們問其中一半的人

to recall either 10 books they read in high school,

回想十本他們在高中所看過的書

or to recall The Ten Commandments,

或是回憶聖經中的十誡

and then we tempted them with cheating.

然後我們嘗試讓他們作弊。

Turns out the people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments --

我們發覺那些嘗試回想十誡的人

and in our sample nobody could recall all of The Ten Commandments --

雖然在我們的標本中沒有任何人能完整背誦出十誡

but those people who tried to recall The Ten Commandments,

但那些嘗試回想聖經十誡的人

given the opportunity to cheat, did not cheat at all.

面對作弊的可能性，卻沒有作弊

It wasn't that the more religious people --

那並不代表對宗教信仰比較虔誠的人

the people who remembered more of the Commandments -- cheated less,

那些能背誦出較多十誡的人，比較少作弊

and the less religious people --

或那些對宗教信仰比較不虔誠的人

the people who couldn't remember almost any Commandments --

那些無法回憶出任何一誡的人

cheated more.

比較會作弊

The moment people thought about trying to recall The Ten Commandments,

在人們嘗試回想十誡的那一刻

they stopped cheating.

他們便不作弊了

In fact, even when we gave self-declared atheists

事實上，就算我們讓那些自稱是無神論的人

the task of swearing on the Bible and we give them a chance to cheat,

把手放在聖經上發誓，然後再給他們作弊的機會

they don't cheat at all.

他們也仍然沒有作弊

Now, Ten Commandments is something that is hard

要把聖經十誡帶進教育系統裏

to bring into the education system, so we said,

是一件困難的事，所以我們說

"Why don't we get people to sign the honor code?"

“不然我們讓人們在榮譽行為準則上簽名吧？”

So, we got people to sign,

於是，我們讓他們簽名，

"I understand that this short survey falls under the MIT Honor Code."

“我認知這份簡短調查遵行麻省理工學院的榮譽準則”

Then they shredded it. No cheating whatsoever.

然後把它撕碎。沒有任何人作弊

And this is particularly interesting,

這真是非常有趣

because MIT doesn't have an honor code.

因為麻省理工學院根本沒有任何榮譽準則

(Laughter)

（笑聲）

So, all this was about decreasing the fudge factor.

這是有關降低蒙混因素的

What about increasing the fudge factor?

又如何提高蒙混因素呢？

The first experiment -- I walked around MIT

第一個實驗中 我在麻省理工學院遊走

and I distributed six-packs of Cokes in the refrigerators --

我把半打可樂放進不同的冰箱中

these were common refrigerators for the undergrads.

都是些給大學生的普通冰箱

And I came back to measure what we technically call

然後再回去測量我們所說的

the half-lifetime of Coke -- how long does it last in the refrigerators?

可樂的人生週期 - 它們能在冰箱裏留多久？

As you can expect it doesn't last very long; people take it.

你可以想像那並沒有多久。人們拿走它們。

In contrast, I took a plate with six one-dollar bills,

相對的，我把一個裝著六張一塊錢美金鈔票的盤子

and I left those plates in the same refrigerators.

放進那些同樣的冰箱

No bill ever disappeared.

沒有任何一張美金被拿走

Now, this is not a good social science experiment,

這大概不是一個好的社會科學實驗

so to do it better I did the same experiment

為了改善我再做了一次一樣的實驗

as I described to you before.

就像我和諸位形容的一樣

A third of the people we passed the sheet, they gave it back to us.

三分之一的人把試驗紙交會給我們

A third of the people we passed it to, they shredded it,

三分之一的人把紙撕碎

they came to us and said,

他們跟我們說

"Mr. Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X dollars."

“先生，我解決了幾個問題，給我幾塊錢。”

A third of the people, when they finished shredding the piece of paper,

三分之一的人，在他們把紙撕碎以後

they came to us and said,

他們跟我們說

"Mr Experimenter, I solved X problems. Give me X tokens."

“先生，我解決了幾個問題，給我幾個代幣。”

We did not pay them with dollars; we paid them with something else.

我們沒有付他們現金，而是一些其他的代替品

And then they took the something else, they walked 12 feet to the side,

他們拿著這些代替品，走到十二英尺遠的旁邊

and exchanged it for dollars.

再把代替品換成現金

Think about the following intuition.

試著想想以下的假設狀況

How bad would you feel about taking a pencil from work home,

從公司拿一支鉛筆

compared to how bad would you feel

或是從公司錢櫃裏拿走十分錢

about taking 10 cents from a petty cash box?

哪一種感覺比較差？

These things feel very differently.

這些事給人的感覺差異很大

Would being a step removed from cash for a few seconds

把現金移動到稍為遠一點的地方，改拿代幣

by being paid by token make a difference?

能不能造成什麼差異？

Our subjects doubled their cheating.

我們實驗物件的作弊情況提高了兩倍

I'll tell you what I think

稍後我會告訴你

about this and the stock market in a minute.

這些例子和股市有什麼關聯

But this did not solve the big problem I had with Enron yet,

但這仍然無法解決我對安隆公司的疑問

because in Enron, there's also a social element.

因為在安隆，還有一個社會性的元素

People see each other behaving.