ADM-201 dump PMP dumps pdf SSCP exam materials CBAP exam sample questions

为何做决定时,我们更关注眼下得失? – 译学馆
未登陆,请登陆后再发表信息
最新评论 (0)
播放视频

为何做决定时,我们更关注眼下得失?

The Allais Paradox

PBS 数码工作室
PBS DIGITAL STUDIOS
首先 我们先假设一个情景
Okay, I have a hypothetical situation for you –
让你来做一个选择
and you need to make a choice.
仔细听好了
Listen carefully.
一天你刚好去看医生
You’ve just visited the doctor
她说 如果你不立即接受治疗
and she told you you’re going to die
很快就会死
unless you get treated immediately.
现在有两种治疗方案
There are two treatments –
蓝色药丸会100%延长12年寿命
The blue pill would give you a 100 % chance of living another 12 years before dying,
而红色药丸有89%的几率能多活12年
and the red pill would give you an 89 % chance of living another 12 years,
10%的几率可以延长到18年
a 10 % chance of living another 18 years
但还有1%的可能会立即死亡
and a 1% chance of sudden death.
那么 你会选择吃哪个?
So,Which do you choose?
记好你的选择
Now remember your answer,
换个稍有不同的情景想一下
and imagine a slightly different scenario.
一直负责你的医生那天不在
Your regular doctor is out that day
所以你去了隔壁有点不靠谱的大夫那
so you go to the slightly dodgier one next door,
他又另外给了你两个治疗方案
who offers you two other treatments:
绿色药九有11%的几率
The green pill gives you an 11 % chance
可以多活12年
of living 12 years
还有89%的可能性立即死亡
and an 89 % chance of sudden death,
而黄色药丸会给你10%的几率多活18年
and the yellow pill gives you a 10 % chance of living a full 18 years before dying,
而有90%的几率使你立即死亡
with a 90% chance of sudden death.
这次你会选择哪一个?
So, which one of these do you choose?
你做出刚才的决定是基于什么?
So what did you base your decisions on?
行为经济学家认为我们的决策行为
Behavioural economists think we make decisions
基于常说的“预期效用”
based on something called expected utility
即我们对事物期望值的大小
it’s how much we expect that something
取决于它所能满足的预期和需求的程度
will satisfy our wants and needs.
如果相比香草冰激凌 你更喜欢巧克力口味
If you like chocolate ice cream more than vanilla,
选择巧克力口味就让你更满意
you’ll feel more satisfied if you choose chocolate
对你来说
So for you,
巧克力冰激凌的预期效用就更高
chocolate ice cream has more expected utility.
研究表明 对于前面那些问题
Studies show that in the previous question
第一个情境里 更多人选择了蓝色药丸
most people choose the blue pill in the first scenario,
确保自己可以多活12年
giving them a guarantee of living another 12 years,
而在第二个场景选择黄色药丸
and the yellow pill in the second scenario,
选择了10%会多活18年
giving them a 10 % chance of living another 18 years,
另90%会立即死亡的那个可能性
and a 90 % chance of death.
但如果我们把所有情况这样罗列出来
But what if instead we write the options out like this:
现在这些选择有部分相同点
Now the options have something in common.
在第一个情境 两种治疗方案
In the first scenario, in both cases
都有89%的几率再活12年
you have an 89 % chance of living 12 years,
所以如果把这部分移除
so if we remove that,
你的决定也不会变 对吧?
your decision shouldn’t change, right?
就像即使冰激淋上没有樱桃
Kind of like how removing a cherry from both ice creams
也不会改变你对口味的喜欢
won’t change your favorite flavor.
在第二个情境中
In the second scenario,
两个选择都有89%的几率死亡
both options have an 89 % chance of death in common,
所以我们把这个死亡几率也去除掉
so we should just be able to cancel those too
而你的决定还是不变
without changing your decision.
先等一下!
Hold on!
现在两种情境变成一样的了
now both scenarios are exactly the same.
但是研究发现
But studies showed that
大多数人在第一个情境里会选择蓝色药丸
most people chose the blue pill in the first scenario
而在第二个情境中选择了黄色药丸
and the yellow pill in the second one,
这说不通啊!
which doesn’t make sense!
蓝色和绿色药丸给你的存活几率
Both the blue and green pills give you a higher chance of living
比获得更长生存期的几率大
over the chance of a longer life,
而红色和黄色药丸都有更长的生存期
and the red and yellow pills give you a chance of a longer life
但缺点是存活的几率更低
but with the drawback of a lower chance of living.
所以对于那些选择蓝色和黄色药片的人来说
So for people who chose the blue and yellow pills,
他们的期望是什么?
what do they want?
有更大的几率存活 还是活得更久?
A higher chance of living or a longer life?
这就是所谓的“阿莱悖论”
This is called the Allais Paradox –
由诺贝尔经济学奖获得者莫里斯·阿莱斯
it was first outlined by Maurice Allais, a Nobel-Prize
在1953年发表的文章中首次提出
winning economist in a 1953 article.
阿莱悖论反驳了预期效用理论
The paradox undermines the theory of expected utility
因为它揭示了我们并不总是
because it shows that we don’t always make decisions that
做出符合我们预期和需求的选择
align with our wants and needs.
决策时我们倾向基于眼下的得失
We tend to make decisions based on
我们当下得失多少
how much we think we have to gain or lose now,
而不是最终收益多少
rather than on the final outcome.
我们厌恶风险 更愿意选择可预见的结果
And we also tend to choose certainty over risk,
即使风险性更高的选择
even if the riskier option
是更接近我们实际需求的
is the one that’s closer to what we really want.
研究阿莱悖论的心理学家发现
Psychologists who have studied the Allais Paradox
人们总体趋向于回避风险
found that people dislike risk in general.
当问题以收益或损失来判断时
When questions are framed in terms of gains or losses,
人们首先会计算要损失多少
people are far more likely to consider the losses first
然后试图把损失降到最低
and try to minimise them
这是一种叫做“损失规避”的现象
– it’s a phenomenon called loss aversion.
它和“遗憾理论”相似
It’s similar to regret theory,
即当我们做决定的时候
which says that when we’re making decisions,
一些人试图尽量减少未来可能产生的后悔心理
some of us try to minimise the amount of regret we feel afterward.
人心真是复杂!
Humans are pretty complicated!
不是每件事都像吃甜筒那么简单
And not everything is as simple as ice cream.
所以说 你会怎么选?
So, what did you decide?
Pronouncenames.com
Pronouncenames.com
阿雷……
Alley…
阿雷……
Alley…
阿莱!
Allais!

发表评论

译制信息
视频概述

在面临选择时,好像总是无法做出理性的决定。我们倾向于规避风险,即使高风险的选项是符合需求的。这是短视的行为吗?这种行为有什么原因呢?

听录译者

收集自网络

翻译译者

短尾龙

审核员

审核员_AK

视频来源

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=c26wIhnDK9Q

相关推荐