关于记忆，大多数人都误会了的四件事
译者： MISS宅原作者：Katherine Harmon
发表时间：2011-08-05浏览量：2927评论数：2挑错数：0
关于记忆，我们都误会了的四件事。对于这几个错误的看法，你是不是也曾一度坚信不疑？与其相信记忆是牢不可摧的铜墙铁壁，不如把他看做是落地即碎的玻璃杯。
Human memory has been shown again and again to be far from perfect. We overlook big things, forget details, conflate events. One famous experiment even demonstrated that many people asked to watch a video of people playing basketball failed to notice a person wearing a gorilla suit walk right through the middle of the scene.
人类的记忆一次又一次地被证明远远不够完美。我们会忽略大的事情，忘记细节，也会将事情弄混。在一个著名的实验中，很多人被要求观看一个篮球赛视频，最后却证实到没人注意到一个装大猩猩的人从视野中穿过了。
So why does eyewitness testimony continue to hold water in courtrooms? A new nationwide survey of 1,500 U.S. adults shows that many people continue to have the wrong idea about how we remember—and what we forget.
那么为什么目击证人的证词在法庭上总是站得住脚的呢？一个基于全美1500名成人的新全国性调查指出，很多人对于我们是如何记忆，忘却事物仍抱有错误观点。
Here are four common incorrect assumptions about memory, held by some of the survey subjects, that experts say should be forgotten:
以下是一些调查中常常出现的四个关于记忆的错误看法，专家说它们理应被忘记：
1. Memory works like a video camera, recording the world around us onto a mental tape that we can later replay.
1 记忆的运作与摄像机一样，它可以将我们周边的世界摄入我们心灵的磁带，而且日后还能被回忆起来。
Nearly two thirds (63 percent) of tho in the random telephone survey said that they agreed with this model of a passively recorded memory. This notion runs counter to rearch that has shown events to be recalled bad on "goals and expectations," the rearchers behind the survey wrote in a new paper, published online August 3 in PLoS ONE. It also "contradicts the well-established idea that memory retrieval is a constructive process," too, which can be shaped by assumptions and beliefs, noted Daniel Simons, of University of Illinois, and his co-author, Christopher Chabris, of Union College, both of whom are psychology professors.
在随机的电话调查中，将近三分之二（63%）的人都认同这种被动留下记忆的模式。这种观点与证实记忆是基于“目标和期望值”才被回忆起来的研究背道而驰。参与调查的专家们将结果记录，并于8月3日发表在PLoS ONE网上。它也“驳斥了记忆是一种建设的过程的想法”。依照这个说法，记忆就可以被假想和信仰塑造了。伊利诺斯大学的Daniel Simons和他来自联合大学的合著者Christopher Chabris共同强调道。他们都是心理学的教授。
2. An unexpected occurrence is likely to be noticed—even when people’s attention is elwhere.
2 一个出人意料的事件会被注意到——甚至是当人们的注意力放在别处时。
More than three quarters (77.5 percent) of people thought that this would be the ca. Clearly, they are unfamiliar with the gorilla suit study. That work and other rearch have shown that unexpected—and even preposterous—details frequently go unnoticed, and thus do not make it into memory. Aside from a fal certainty that one would notice more people wearing oversized primate costumes, this presumption could have some rious implications for the legal system and eyewitness testimony. "If juries and lawyers believe that a suspect ‘should have’ noticed some event, they will tend to e claims of ignorance as deliberate attempts to deceive," Simons and Chabris wrote.
大于百分之七十五（77.5%)的人是这样认为的。显而易见地，他们对那个人扮猩猩的实验并不熟悉。那个实验和其他研究显示出的是——出人意料的，甚至是不合理的——细节常常被忽略，那些东西并不会进到记忆中。除了某人可能会看到更多穿了很大的灵长类动物的衣服的人，这种虚假的确定性以外，这样的假设还可能会对法律系统和目击者证言造成严重影响。“如果陪审团和律师相信嫌疑犯‘本该’注意到一些事情，而他却没注意到，那么在嫌疑犯试图故意欺诈时，他们将倾向于无视那些诉求。”Simons和 Chabris写道。
3. Hypnosis can improve memory—especially when assisting a witness in recalling details associated with a crime.
3 催眠术可以改善记忆——特别是在帮助目击者回忆起与犯罪有关的细节的时候。
Most memory experts disagree with this statement, but more than half (55.4 percent) of the surveyed public thought that it was accurate. Courts have already steered away from accepting testimony that was gathered through hypnosis. And many studies have demonstrated that people under hypnosis—and even tho who are not—can often be led by questioners to "recall" things that never occurred.
大多数记忆专家不相信这种说法，但是多于半数的公众受访者（55.4%）认为这是对的。法院已经不再接收通过催眠收集到的证据了。很多研究表明人们在催眠状态下——甚至不在催眠状态下——都可以在提问者的引导下“回忆”起那些压根就没发生的事。
