黄色一级a毛片-日韩欧美在线免费观看-亚洲天堂影音先锋-性欧美大战久久久久久久83-ww欧美-一区福利-97高清国语自产拍-人人看人人爽-天堂网一区-久久水蜜桃-久久久久久黄-男人j进入女人j内部免费网站-波多野结衣精品在线-99热这里精品-99精品网-日韩在线网

People's motivations bias how they gather information

人類的動機會對其收集信息的方式有所影響

上海譯銳翻譯   2019-7-8     10:58 a.m.

A new study suggests people stop gathering evidence earlier when the data supports their desired conclusion than when it supports the conclusion they wish was false. Filip Gesiarz, Donal Cahill and Tali Sharot of University College London, U.K. report in PLOS Computational Biology.

英國倫敦大學學院的Filip Gesiarz、Donal Cahill和Tali Sharot在《公共科學圖書館計算生物學》發表了一篇新的論文。根據新的研究，當證據與人們所希望的結論相符時，他們便會更早停止收集證據。但是，當證據證明他們所希望的結論是不正確的時，他們就會繼續收集證據。

Previous studies had already provided some clues that people gather less information before reaching desirable beliefs. For example, people are more likely to seek a second medical opinion when the first diagnosis is grave. However, certain design limitations of those studies prevented a definitive conclusion and the reasons behind this bias was previously unknown. By fitting people's behavior to a mathematical model Gesiarz and colleagues were able to identify the reasons for this bias.

此前的研究已經提供了一些線索，這些線索表明，人們在獲得想要的結論前所收集的信息會更少。比如，當第一次診斷比較嚴重時，人們更有可能去尋找第二種醫學觀點。然而，這些研究中所存在的某些設計上的局限性防止形成一個具體的結論，而這一影響的原因在此前卻屬于未知數。通過將人類的行為與數學模型相匹配，Gesiarz和他的同事們能夠發現這一影響背后的原因。

"Our research suggests that people start with an assumption that their favored conclusion is more likely true and weight each piece of evidence supporting it more than evidence opposing it. Because of that, people will find no need to gather additional information that could have revealed their conclusion to be false. They will stop the investigation as soon as the jury tilts in their favor" said Gesiarz.

Gesiarz表示：“我們的研究表明，人們會在一開始提供一個假設。根據這一假設，他們所希望的結論則更有可能是真實的。在這一假設中，和那些與結論背道而馳的證據相比，他們會重視每一條支持這一結論的證據。正因為如此，人們發現他們不需要收集更多可能會證明他們的結論是錯誤的信息。當陪審團將天平的一側向贊成傾斜時，他們會立刻停止調查。”

In this new study 84 volunteers played an online categorization game in which they could gather as much evidence as they wanted to help them make judgements and were paid according to how accurate they were. In addition, if the evidence pointed to a certain category they would get bonus points and if it pointed to another category they would lose points. So while there was reason to wish the evidence pointed to a specific judgement, the only way for volunteers to maximize rewards was to provide accurate responses. Despite this, they found that the volunteers stopped gathering data earlier when it supported the conclusion they wished was true than when it supported the undesirable conclusion.

在這項新的研究中，84位志愿者要玩一款在線分類游戲。在這個游戲中，他們可以收集盡可能多的信息來進行判斷，系統會根據這些判斷的準確性對他們進行付款獎勵。此外，如果證據指向某個類別，那么，志愿者可以獲得獎勵分。如果證據指向另外一個類別，則志愿者可能會失分。因此，盡管志愿者有理由希望證據指向一個具體的判斷，但是志愿者獲得最高獎勵的唯一方法就是提供準確的回答。盡管如此，研究人員發現，當證據表明他們所期望的結論是真實的，那么他們就會提前停止收集信息。如果證據指向一個他們所不期望看到的結論，則他們會繼續收集數據。

"Today, a limitless amount of information is available at the click of a mouse," Sharot says. "However, because people are likely to conduct less through searches when the first few hits provide desirable information, this wealth of data will not necessarily translate to more accurate beliefs."

Sharot表示：“今天，只要輕輕一點鼠標，就會有無數的信息。但是，如果前幾次點擊就為人們提供了他們想要的信息，那么人們就可能不會再進行深入的搜尋。那么，豐富的數據則肯定無法轉化為正確的觀念。”

Next, the authors hope to determine what factors make certain individuals more likely to have a bias in how they gather information than others. For instance, they are curious whether children might show the same bias revealed in this study, or whether people with depression, which is associated with motivation problems, have different data-gathering patterns.

接下來，作者們希望判斷哪些因素會讓某些人比其他人更有可能對他們收集信息的方式有偏見。比如，他們很想知道孩子們是否持有同樣的偏見，或消極的、存在動機問題的人群是否有不同的數據收集方式。

文章來源：科學日報      編輯：Susan