快捷搜索: 紐約時報  抗疫  疫情  經濟學人  武漢  教育 

如何說服人們改變他們的行為

  Government and public health organizations have been tasked with the challenge of changing behavior—getting people to not only practice social distancing and shelter in place but do it for weeks and potentially months.Not surprisingly,almost everyone is relying on the standard approach to drive change:Tell people what to do.Issue demands like:“Don’t go out,”“Stay six feet apart,”Wash your hands,”and“Wear face masks.”

  政府和公共衛生組織面臨著改變公眾行為的挑戰,使人們不僅要實行社會隔離和安置,而且要進行數周甚至數月的時間。不足為奇的是,幾乎所有人都依賴于標準方法來推動變革即告訴人們該做什么。問題要求如:“不要外出”,“相隔六英尺”,“洗手”和“戴口罩”。

  While a lot of us are following recommendations so far,making sure everyone sticks with them for the long haul is a tougher ask.Some people are still or have resumed congregating in groups.Some churches,with support from their local leaders,are flouting stay-at-home orders.And protesters have begun to demand that businesses reopen sooner than experts suggest.

  到目前為止,雖然我們很多人都在遵循建議,但要確保每個人都長期堅持下去,但這仍是一個比較棘手的問題。有些人仍然或重新開始成群結隊。一些教會在當地領導人的支持下,無視“宅在家”的命令??棺h者已經開始要求企業更早恢復營業(比專家建議的還早)。

  Directives aren’t particularly effective in driving sustained behavior change because we all like to feel as if we are in control of our choices.Why did I buy that product,use that service,or take that action?Because I wanted to.So when others try to influence our decisions,we don’t just go along,we push back against the persuasive attempt.We get together with a friend,shop more than once a week,don’t wear a mask.We avoid doing what they suggested because we don’t want to feel like someone else is controlling us.

  指令在推動持續的行為改變方面并不是特別有效,因為我們都喜歡感覺自己可以控制自己的選擇。為什么我要買那個產品,使用那個服務,或者采取那個行動?因為我想。因此,當別人試圖影響我們的決定時,我們不會隨波逐流,我們會抵制他們說服我們的企圖。我們和朋友聚會,一周購物不止一次,不戴口罩。我們避免做他們建議的事情,因為我們不想感覺別人在控制我們。

  Our innate anti-persuasion radar raises our defenses,so we avoid or ignore the message or,even worse,counter-argue,conjuring up all the reasons why what someone else suggested is a bad idea.Sure,the governor said to stay home but they’re overreacting.Maybe the virus is bad in some part of the country,but I don’t know a single person whose gotten it.And besides,many people who get it are fine anyway,so what’s the big deal?Like an overzealous high school debater,they poke and prod and raise objections until the persuasive power of the message crumbles.

  我們天生的“反說服思想”會提高我們的防御能力,所以我們會忽視別人的信息,或者更糟的是,“反辯論”,想出所有的理由來說明為什么別人的建議是一個壞主意。當然,州長說要呆在家里,但是他們反應過度了。也許病毒在這個國家的某些地方是有害的,但我不知道誰感染了它。而且,很多人感染它,但身體也很好,所以有什么大不了的?就像一個過分熱心的高中辯手,他們不停地辯論,提出反對意見,直到自己的說服力消散為止。

  So if telling people to do doesn’t work,what does?Rather than trying to persuade people,getting them to persuade themselves is often more effective.Here are three ways to do that.

  所以,如果告訴人們做什么沒用,那什么又有用?與其試圖說服別人,不如讓他們說服自己往往更有效。這里有三種方法。

  1.Highlight a gap.

  1.突出差距。


  You can increase people’s sense of freedom and control by pointing out a disconnect between their thoughts and actions,or between what they might recommend for others versus do themselves.

  你可以通過指出他們的思想和行動之間的脫節,或者他們為別人推薦的和自己做的之間的脫節,來增加人們的自由感和控制感。
紐約時報中英文網 http://www.244129.buzz
  Take staying at home.For young people who might resist,ask what they would suggest an elderly grandparent or a younger brother or sister do.Would they want them out,interacting with possibly infected people?If not,why do they think it’s safe for them to do so?

  以呆在家里為例。對于可能會有抵觸情緒的年輕人,問問他們會建議年長的祖父母或弟弟妹妹做什么。他們想讓他們出來,和可能感染的人交流嗎?如果不是,為什么他們認為這樣做是安全的?

  People strive for internal consistency.They want their attitudes and actions to line up.Highlighting misalignment encourages them to resolve the disconnect.

  人們追求內在的一致性。他們希望自己的態度和行動一致。強調不一致可以鼓勵他們解決脫節。

  Health officials in Thailand used this approach in anti-smoking campaign.Rather than telling smokers their habit was bad,they had little kids come up to smokers on the street and ask them for a light.Not surprisingly,the smokers told the kids no.Many even lectured the little boys and girls about the dangers of smoking.But before turning to walk away,the kids handed the smokers a note that said,“You worry about me…But why not about yourself?”At the bottom was a toll-free number smokers could call to get help.Calls to that line jumped more than 60%during the campaign.

  泰國衛生官員在反吸煙運動中使用了這種方法。他們沒有告訴吸煙者他們的習慣是不好的,而是讓小孩子們在街上走向吸煙者,請他們給自己點煙。毫無疑問,吸煙者會對孩子們說不。許多人甚至向孩子們宣講吸煙的危害。但在轉身離開之前,孩子們遞給吸煙者一張紙條,上面寫著:“你擔心我,但為什么不擔心你自己?”在最后會有一個免費電話號碼,吸煙者可以打電話求助。在這項活動期間,這條熱線的電話躍升了60%以上。

  2.Pose questions.

  2.提出問題。


  Another way to allow for agency is to ask questions rather than make statements.Public health messaging tries to be direct:“Junk food makes you fat.”“Drunk driving is murder.”“Keep sheltering in place.”But being so forceful can make people feel threatened.The same content can be phrased in terms of a question:“Do you think junk food is good for you?”If someone’s answer is no,they’re now in a tough spot.By encouraging them to articulate their opinion,they’ve had to put a stake in the ground—to admit that those things aren’t good for them.And once they’ve done that,it becomes harder to keep justify the bad behaviors.

  另一種方法是提出問題而不是發表聲明。公共衛生信息盡量直接:“垃圾食品讓你變胖。”“酒后駕車是謀殺。”“保持掩體就位。”但是太強勢會讓人感到威脅。同樣的內容可以用問題的形式來表達:“你認為垃圾食品對你有好處嗎?”如果有人的回答是“不”,那他們現在的處境就不妙了。通過鼓勵他們表達自己的觀點,他們不得不冒著風險承認這些事情對他們不利。一旦他們這樣做了,就很難為他們的不良行為辯護了。

  Questions shift the listener’s role.Rather than counter-arguing or thinking about all the reasons they disagree,they’re sorting through their answer to your query and their feelings or opinions on the matter.And this shift increases buy-in.It encourages people to commit to the conclusion,because while people might not want to follow someone else’s lead,they’re more than happy to follow their own.The answer to the question isn’t just any answer;it’s their answer,reflecting their own personal thoughts,beliefs,and preferences.That makes it more likely to drive action.
紐約時報中英文網 http://www.244129.buzz/


  問題改變了聽者的角色。他們不是反駁或思考所有他們不同意的原因,而是整理他們對你的問題的回答以及他們對這件事的感受或意見。這種轉變增加了效果。它鼓勵人們遵循結論,因為雖然人們可能不想跟隨別人的領導,但他們更樂意跟隨自己的領導。這個問題的答案不是隨便一個答案;這是他們的回答,反映了他們自己的思想、信仰和偏好。這使得它更有可能推動行動。

  In the case of this crisis,questions like“How bad would it be if your loved ones got sick?”could prove more effective than directives in driving commitment to long-term or intermittent social distancing and vigilant hygiene practices.

  在這場危機中,像這樣的問題:如果你的親人生病了,情況會有多糟?在推動長期或間歇性的社會隔離和警惕的衛生實踐方面,可能比指示更有效。

  3.Ask for less.

  3.要求更少。


  The third approach is to reduce the size of the ask.

  第三種方法是減少請求的大小。

  A doctor was dealing with an obese trucker who was drinking three liters of Mountain Dew a day.She wanted to ask him to quit cold turkey,but knew that would probably fail,so she tried something else.She asked him to go from three liters a day to two.He grumbled,but after a few weeks,was able to make the switch.Then,on the next visit,she asked him to cut down to one liter a day.Finally,after he was able to do that,only then did she suggest cutting the soda out entirely.The trucker still drinks a can of Mountain Dew once in a while,but he’s lost more than 25 pounds.

  一個醫生正在治療一個肥胖的卡車司機,他每天喝三公升的激浪。她想讓他戒掉這個習慣,但她知道那可能會失敗,所以她嘗試了別的辦法。她要求他把每天的飲用量從三升減少到兩升。他嘟囔著,但幾周后,他終于做出了改變。然后,在下次訪問時,她要求他減少一公升。最終,在他能夠做到之后,她才建議將蘇打水完全切掉??ㄜ囁緳C仍然偶爾會喝一罐激浪,但他的體重減輕了25磅以上。

  Especially in times of crisis,health organizations want big change right away.Everyone should continue to stay at home,by themselves,for two more months.But asks this big often get rejected.They’re so different from what people are doing currently that they fall into what scientists call“the region of rejection”and get ignored.

  尤其是在危機時期,衛生組織希望立即做出重大改變。每個人都應該繼續獨自呆在家里兩個多月。但要求這么大的經常被拒絕。它們與人們目前正在做的事情是如此不同,以至于它們落入了科學家所說的“排斥區域”而被忽視。

  A better approach is to dial down the initial request.Ask for less initially,and then ask for more.Take a big ask and break it down into smaller,more manageable chunks.Government officials responding to the pandemic are already doing this to some extent by setting initial end dates for social distancing measures,then extending them.But there might be more opportunities,for example when experts allow for some restrictions to be lifted—say,on small gatherings—but insist that others,such as concerts or sporting events,continue to be banned.

  一個更好的方法是減少最初的請求。一開始要求少一點,然后要求多一點。接受一個大的請求,把它分成更小、更容易處理的幾個部分。應對流感大流行的政府官員在一定程度上已經在這樣做了,他們為社會疏遠措施設定了最初的結束日期,然后再延長。但可能會有更多的機會,例如,當專家允許取消一些限制(比如小型集會),但堅持其他的(如音樂會或體育賽事)繼續被禁止。

  Whether we’re encouraging people to socially distance,shop only once a week,thoroughly wash hands and wear face masks,or change behavior more broadly,too often we default to a particular approach:Pushing.We assume that if we just remind people again or give them more facts,figures,or reasons,they’ll come around.But,as recent backlash against the Covid-19-related restrictions suggests,this doesn’t always work over the long term,especially when your demands have no fixed end date.

  無論我們是在鼓勵人們保持社交隔離、每周只購物一次、徹底洗手、戴口罩,還是更廣泛地改變行為,我們通常都會默認一種特定的方式:推動。我們假設,如果我們只是再次提醒人們或給他們更多的事實、數據或理由,他們就會回心轉意。但是,正如最近對Covid-19相關限制的強烈反對所表明的那樣,這并不總是長期有效,特別是當你的要求沒有固定的截止日期時。

  If we instead understand the key barriers preventing change,such as reactance,and employ tactics designed to overcome them,we can change anything.

  相反,如果我們理解了阻礙改變的關鍵障礙,比如抗拒,并采用旨在克服這些障礙的策略,我們就可以改變任何事情。
網站部分信息來源于自互聯網和網友上傳,只為方便大家查詢瀏覽,請自行核對信息的真實情況,本站將不承擔任何責任!

您可以還會對下面的文章感興趣:

  • 36小時環游新加坡
  • 中國頒布新規,限制未成年人玩游戲
  • 辭掉工作、花了57天,他們找回了走失的狗
  • 改善健康也許很簡單:每天少吃300卡
  • 從《老友記》到《早間新聞》,詹妮弗·安妮斯頓的新旅程
  • 最新評論

    留言與評論(共有 條評論)
       
    驗證碼:
    美人捕鱼教程