3 kinds of bias that shape your worldview | J. Marshall Shepherd

Prevoditelj: Viktorija Đuđik Recezent: Sanda L

I'm a meteorologist by degree,

Ja sam meteorolog po struci,

I have a bachelor's, master's and PhD in physical meteorology,

završio sam prvostupnički, diplomski i doktorski iz meteorologije,

so I'm a meteorologist, card carrying.

dakle, ja sam meteorolog, od glave do pete.

And so with that comes four questions, always.

I s tim dolaze četiri pitanja, uvijek.

This is one prediction I will always get right.

To je jedno predviđanje koje uvijek pogodim.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

And those questions are,

A ta pitanja su:

"Marshall, what channel are you on?"

"Marshall, na kojem si programu?"

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

"Dr. Shepherd, what's the weather going to be tomorrow?"

"Dr. Shepherd, kakvo će vrijeme biti sutra?"

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

And oh, I love this one:

I, volim ovo:

"My daughter is getting married next September, it's an outdoor wedding.

"Moja kći se udaje sljedećeg rujna, svadba će biti na otvorenom.

Is it going to rain?"

Hoće li padati kiša?"

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Not kidding, I get those, and I don't know the answer to that,

Ne šalim se, pitaju me to, i ne znam odgovor,

the science isn't there.

znanost to još ne zna.

But the one I get a lot these days is,

No, u zadnje vrijeme me često pitaju:

"Dr. Shepherd, do you believe in climate change?"

"Dr. Shepherd, vjerujete li u klimatske promjene?"

"Do you believe in global warming?"

"Vjerujete li u globalno zatopljenje?"

Now, I have to gather myself every time I get that question.

Moram se sabrati svaki put kad me to pitaju.

Because it's an ill-posed question --

Jer je pitanje loše postavljeno,

science isn't a belief system.

znanost nije sustav vjerovanja.

My son, he's 10 -- he believes in the tooth fairy.

Moj sin, ima 10 godina, vjeruje u Zubić vilu.

And he needs to get over that, because I'm losing dollars, fast.

I to treba proći jer gubim novac, brzo.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But he believes in the tooth fairy.

Ali on vjeruje u Zubić vilu.

But consider this.

Razmislite o ovome.

Bank of America building, there, in Atlanta.

Zgrada Bank of America u Atlanti.

You never hear anyone say,

Nikada nećete čuti da netko kaže:

"Do you believe, if you go to the top of that building

"Vjeruješ li, ako odeš na vrh zgrade

and throw a ball off, it's going to fall?"

i s nje baciš loptu, da će ona pasti?"

You never hear that, because gravity is a thing.

To nećete čuti jer je gravitacija prihvaćena.

So why don't we hear the question,

Zašto ne čujemo pitanje:

"Do you believe in gravity?"

"Vjeruješ li u gravitaciju?"

But of course, we hear the question,

Ali naravno, čujemo pitanje,

"Do you believe in global warming?"

"Vjeruješ li u globalno zatopljenje?"

Well, consider these facts.

Pa, razmislite o ovim činjenicama.

The American Association for the Advancement of Science, AAAS,

Američko društvo za unapređenje znanosti, AAAS,

one of the leading organizations in science,

jedna od vodećih organizacija u znanosti,

queried scientists and the public on different science topics.

ispitala je znanstvenike i javnost o različitim znanstvenim temama.

Here are some of them:

Ovo su neke od njih:

genetically modified food, animal research, human evolution.

GMO, istraživanja na životinjama, ljudska evolucija.

And look at what the scientists say about those,

Pogledajte što znanstvenici kažu o tome,

the people that actually study those topics, in red,

ljudi koji proučavaju te teme, crveno,

versus the gray, what the public thinks.

u odnosu na sivo, što javnost misli.

How did we get there?

Kako smo došli do toga?

How did we get there?

Kako smo došli do toga,

That scientists and the public are so far apart on these science issues.

da su znanstvenici i javnost tako podijeljeni u znanstvenim pitanjima?

Well, I'll come a little bit closer to home for me,

Objasnit ću na nečemu što mi je blisko,

climate change.

klimatskim promjenama.

Eighty-seven percent of scientists

87 % znanstvenika

believe that humans are contributing to climate change.

vjeruje da ljudi doprinose klimatskim promjenama.

But only 50 percent of the public?

Ali samo 50 % javnosti?

How did we get there?

Kako smo došli do toga?

So it begs the question,

Tako dolazimo do pitanja,

what shapes perceptions about science?

što oblikuje mišljenje o znanosti?

It's an interesting question

To je zanimljivo pitanje

and one that I've been thinking about quite a bit.

o kojem sam dosta razmišljao.

I think that one thing that shapes perceptions in the public, about science,

Mislim da pogled na znanost u javnosti oblikuju

is belief systems and biases.

sustavi vjerovanja i predrasude.

Belief systems and biases.

Sustavi vjerovanja i predrasude.

Go with me for a moment.

Pratite me na trenutak.

Because I want to talk about three elements of that:

Jer želim govoriti o tri elementa toga:

confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger effect

sklonosti potvrdi, Dunning-Krugerovom efektu

and cognitive dissonance.

i kognitivnoj disonanci.

Now, these sound like big, fancy, academic terms, and they are.

Zvuče kao veliki, otmjeni, akademski pojmovi, i jesu.

But when I describe them, you're going to be like, "Oh!

Ali kad ih opišem, reći ćete: "O!

I recognize that; I even know somebody that does that."

Prepoznajem to, čak znam nekoga tko to radi."

Confirmation bias.

Sklonost potvrdi.

Finding evidence that supports what we already believe.

Pronalaženje dokaza koji potvrđuju ono što već vjerujemo.

Now, we're probably all a little bit guilty of that at times.

Vjerojatno to svi ponekad radimo.

Take a look at this.

Pogledajte ovo.

I'm on Twitter.

Na Twitteru sam.

And often, when it snows,

I često, kad pada snijeg,

I'll get this tweet back to me.

pošalju mi ovo.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

"Hey, Dr. Shepherd, I have 20 inches of global warming in my yard,

"Hey, dr. Shepherd, imam 50 cm globalnog zatopljenja u dvorištu,

what are you guys talking about, climate change?"

o kakvim klimatskim promjenama vi pričate?"

I get that tweet a lot, actually.

Često mi to, zapravo, pošalju.

It's a cute tweet, it makes me chuckle as well.

Slatka objava, nasmijem se na to.

But it's oh, so fundamentally scientifically flawed.

Ali je u temelju znanstveno pogrešna.

Because it illustrates

Jer pokazuje

that the person tweeting doesn't understand

da osoba koja to objavi ne razumije

the difference between weather and climate.

razliku između vremena i klime.

I often say, weather is your mood

Često kažem, vrijeme je vaše raspoloženje

and climate is your personality.

a klima je osobnost.

Think about that.

Razmislite o tome.

Vrijeme je raspoloženje, klima je osobnost.

Weather is your mood, climate is your personality.

Your mood today doesn't necessarily tell me anything about your personality,

Vaše raspoloženje danas ne govori nužno išta o vašoj osobnosti,

nor does a cold day tell me anything about climate change,

niti mi hladan dan govori išta o klimatskim promjenama,

or a hot day, for that matter.

ili topao dan isto tako.

Dunning-Kruger.

Dunning-Kruger.

Two scholars from Cornell came up with the Dunning-Kruger effect.

Dva znanstvenika s Cornella su izmislila Dunning-Krugerov efekt.

If you go look up the peer-reviewed paper for this,

Ako pogledate recenziran rad o ovome,

vidjet ćete svakakvu otmjenu terminologiju:

you will see all kinds of fancy terminology:

it's an illusory superiority complex, thinking we know things.

To je iluzorni kompleks superiornosti, misliti da znamo stvari.

In other words, people think they know more than they do.

Drugim riječima, ljudi misle da znaju više nego što znaju.

Or they underestimate what they don't know.

Ili podcjenjuju ono što ne znaju.

And then, there's cognitive dissonance.

Zatim imamo kognitivnu disonancu.

Cognitive dissonance is interesting.

Kognitivna disonanca je zanimljiva.

We just recently had Groundhog Day, right?

Upravo smo imali Sviščev dan, zar ne?

Now, there's no better definition of cognitive dissonance

Nema bolje definicije kognitivne disonance

than intelligent people asking me if a rodent's forecast is accurate.

nego kad me inteligentni ljudi pitaju je li prognoza glodavca točna.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But I get that, all of the time.

Ali me to stalno pitaju.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But I also hear about the Farmer's Almanac.

Također čujem za Farmerski almanah.

We grew up on the Farmer's Almanac, people are familiar with it.

Odrasli smo s Farmerskim almanahom, ljudima je poznat.

The problem is, it's only about 37 percent accurate,

Problem je što je samo oko 37 % točan,

according to studies at Penn State University.

prema studijama Sveučilišta Penn State.

But we're in an era of science

Ali mi smo u eri znanosti

where we actually can forecast the weather.

i zaista možemo predvidjeti vrijeme.

Vjerovali ili ne, i znam da neki od vas misle: "Da, stvarno",

And believe it or not, and I know some of you are like, "Yeah, right,"

u oko 90 % slučajeva ili više, točni smo s vremenskom prognozom.

we're about 90 percent accurate, or more, with weather forecast.

Vi obično zapamtite povremene propuste.

You just tend to remember the occasional miss, you do.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

So confirmation bias, Dunning-Kruger and cognitive dissonance.

Sklonost potvrdi, Dunning-Kruger i kognitivna disonanca.

I think those shape biases and perceptions that people have about science.

Mislim da oni oblikuju predrasude i percepcije ljudi o znanosti.

But then, there's literacy and misinformation

S druge strane, pismenost i dezinformacije

that keep us boxed in, as well.

nam također zatvaraju vidike.

During the hurricane season of 2017,

Tijekom sezone uragana 2017. godine,

media outlets had to actually assign reporters

mediji su zaista morali zadati novinarima

to dismiss fake information about the weather forecast.

da zanemare lažne informacije o vremenskoj prognozi.

That's the era that we're in.

U takvom razdoblju živimo.

I deal with this all the time in social media.

S time se moram stalno boriti u društvenim medijima.

Someone will tweet a forecast --

Netko objavi prognozu -

that's a forecast for Hurricane Irma, but here's the problem:

ovo je prognoza za uragan Irmu, ali tu je problem:

it didn't come from the Hurricane Center.

nije ju izdao Centar za uragane.

But people were tweeting and sharing this; it went viral.

Ali ljudi su je objavljivali i dijelili, brzo se širilo.

It didn't come from the National Hurricane Center at all.

Nije ju uopće objavio Nacionalni centar za uragane.

So I spent 12 years of my career at NASA

Proveo sam 12 godina karijere u NASA-i

before coming to the University of Georgia,

prije dolaska na Sveučilište Georgia

and I chair their Earth Science Advisory Committee,

i vodio sam Savjetodavni odbor za znanost o Zemlji,

I was just up there last week in DC.

prošli tjedan sam bio tamo u Washingtonu.

And I saw some really interesting things.

I vidio sam nešto vrlo zanimljivo.

Here's a NASA model and science data from satellite

Ovo je NASA-in model i znanstveni podaci sa satelita

showing the 2017 hurricane season.

koji pokazuju sezonu uragana 2017.

You see Hurricane Harvey there?

Vidite li tamo uragan Harvey?

Look at all the dust coming off of Africa.

Pogledajte svu prašinu koja dolazi iz Afrike.

Look at the wildfires up in northwest US and in western Canada.

Pogledajte sve požare na sjeverozapadu SAD-a i na zapadu Kanade.

There comes Hurricane Irma.

Evo uragana Irme.

This is fascinating to me.

Ovo mi je nevjerojatno.

But admittedly, I'm a weather geek.

Doduše, ja sam zaljubljenik u vrijeme.

But more importantly, it illustrates that we have the technology

Još važnije, ovo pokazuje da imamo tehnologiju,

to not only observe the weather and climate system,

ne samo da promatramo vrijeme i klimatski sustav,

but predict it.

nego da ga i predviđamo.

There's scientific understanding,

Postoji znanstveno shvaćanje,

so there's no need for some of those perceptions and biases

stoga nema potrebe za nekim od onih percepcija i predrasuda

that we've been talking about.

o kojima smo razgovarali.

We have knowledge.

Imamo znanje.

But think about this ...

Ali razmislite o ovome...

This is Houston, Texas, after Hurricane Harvey.

Ovo je Houston, u Teksasu, nakon uragana Harvey.

Now, I write a contribution for "Forbes" magazine periodically,

Naime, povremeno pišem za časopis Forbes

and I wrote an article a week before Hurricane Harvey made landfall, saying,

i napisao sam članak tjedan prije udara uragana Harvey te naveo,

"There's probably going to be 40 to 50 inches of rainfall."

"Vjerojatno će biti 101 do 127 centimetara oborina."

I wrote that a week before it happened.

Napisao sam to tjedan prije nego što se dogodilo.

But yet, when you talk to people in Houston,

Međutim, kad pričate s ljudima u Houstonu,

people are saying, "We had no idea it was going to be this bad."

oni govore: "Nismo imali pojma da će biti ovako loše."

I'm just...

Samo...

(Sigh)

(Uzdah)

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

A week before.

Tjedan dana prije.

But --

Ali...

I know, it's amusing, but the reality is,

Znam, smiješno je, ali zapravo,

we all struggle with perceiving something outside of our experience level.

svi se borimo da shvatimo nešto iznad naše razine iskustva.

People in Houston get rain all of the time,

Ljudi u Houstonu stalno imaju kišu

they flood all of the time.

i stalno imaju poplave.

But they've never experienced that.

Ali nikad nisu ovo iskusili.

Houston gets about 34 inches of rainfall for the entire year.

Houston dobije oko 86 cm oborina za cijelu godinu.

They got 50 inches in three days.

Sad su dobili 127 cm u 3 dana.

That's an anomaly event, that's outside of the normal.

Taj događaj je nepravilnost, izvan uobičajenog.

So belief systems and biases, literacy and misinformation.

Sustav vjerovanja i predrasude, pismenost i dezinformacije.

How do we step out of the boxes that are cornering our perceptions?

Kako da izađemo iz okvira koji određuju naše percepcije?

Well we don't even have to go to Houston, we can come very close to home.

Ne moramo ni ići u Houston, možemo biti i blizu doma.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Remember "Snowpocalypse?"

Sjećate li se "Snijegokalipse?"

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Snowmageddon?

Snijegmagedona?

Snowzilla?

Snijegzille?

Whatever you want to call it.

Kako god to želite zvati.

All two inches of it.

Svih pet centimetara toga.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

Two inches of snow shut the city of Atlanta down.

Pet centimetara snijega je zatvorilo cijeli grad Atlantu.

(Laughter)

(Smijeh)

But the reality is, we were in a winter storm watch,

U stvarnosti, bili smo u pripremi za snijeg,

we went to a winter weather advisory,

bili smo kod savjetnika za zimsko vrijeme

and a lot of people perceived that as being a downgrade,

i puno ljudi je to shvatilo kao ne toliko važno,

"Oh, it's not going to be as bad."

"O, neće biti tako strašno."

Zapravo, percepcija je bila da neće biti tako strašno,

When in fact, the perception was that it was not going to be as bad,

but it was actually an upgrade.

ali je to zapravo bilo pogoršanje.

Situacija se pogoršavala kako su modeli dolazili.

Things were getting worse as the models were coming in.

So that's an example of how we get boxed in by our perceptions.

I to je primjer kako smo pod utjecajem naših percepcija.

So, the question becomes,

Tako nastaje pitanje,

how do we expand our radius?

kako da proširimo naš radijus?

The area of a circle is "pi r squared".

Površina kruga je "π x r na kvadrat".

We increase the radius, we increase the area.

Ako povećamo radijus, povećat ćemo površinu.

How do we expand our radius of understanding about science?

Kako da povećamo naš radijus razumijevanja znanosti?

Here are my thoughts.

Ja mislim ovako.

You take inventory of your own biases.

Napravite popis svojih predrasuda.

And I'm challenging you all to do that.

I sve vas izazivam da to napravite.

Take an inventory of your own biases.

Napravite popis svojih predrasuda.

Where do they come from?

Odakle dolaze?

Your upbringing, your political perspective, your faith --

Iz vašeg odrastanja, političke perspektive, vjere...

what shapes your own biases?

Što oblikuje vaše predrasude?

Then, evaluate your sources --

Zatim, ocijenite izvore...

where do you get your information on science?

odakle dobivate informacije o znanosti?

What do you read, what do you listen to,

Što čitate, što slušate

to consume your information on science?

da dobijete informacije o znanosti?

And then, it's important to speak out.

A onda, važno je da progovorite.

Talk about how you evaluated your biases and evaluated your sources.

Razgovarajte kako ste ocijenili svoje predrasude i izvore.

I want you to listen to this little 40-second clip

Želim da poslušate kratki isječak od 40 sekundi

from one of the top TV meteorologists in the US, Greg Fishel,

jednog od najboljih TV meteorologa u SAD-u, Grega Fishela,

in the Raleigh, Durham area.

u Raleighu, iz područja Durhama.

He's revered in that region.

Cijenjen je u tom području.

But he was a climate skeptic.

Ali je bio skeptik oko klime.

But listen to what he says about speaking out.

No, poslušajte što kaže o progovaranju.

Greg Fishel: The mistake I was making

Greg Fishel: Pogreška koju sam činio,

and didn't realize until very recently,

a tek sam je nedavno primijetio,

was that I was only looking for information

bila je što sam tražio samo one informacije

to support what I already thought,

koje bi potvrdile ono što sam već mislio

and was not interested in listening to anything contrary.

i nije me zanimalo što kažu oni suprotnog mišljenja.

And so I woke up one morning,

I tako sam se probudio jednog jutra

and there was this question in my mind,

s jednim pitanjem u glavi,

"Greg, are you engaging in confirmation bias?

"Greg, upuštaš li se ti u sklonost potvrdi?

Are you only looking for information to support what you already think?"

Tražiš li samo informacije koje potvrđuju ono što već misliš?"

And if I was honest with myself, and I tried to be,

I da budem iskren sa sobom, a trudio sam se biti,

I admitted that was going on.

priznao sam da se to događa.

And so the more I talked to scientists

I što sam više razgovarao sa znanstvenicima

and read peer-reviewed literature

i čitao recenziranu literaturu

and tried to conduct myself the way I'd been taught to conduct myself

te se pokušavao ponašati onako kako sam naučen ponašati se

at Penn State when I was a student,

na Penn Stateu gdje sam studirao,

it became very difficult for me to make the argument

postalo mi je jako teško braniti argument

that we weren't at least having some effect.

da nismo imali barem nekakvog učinka.

Maybe there was still a doubt as to how much,

Možda je još bilo sumnje koliko točno,

but to say "nothing" was not a responsible thing for me to do

ali reći "ništa" nije bilo odgovorno od mene

as a scientist or a person.

kao znanstvenika ili osobe.

JMS: Greg Fishel just talked about expanding his radius

JMS: Greg Fishel je govorio o proširivanju radijusa

of understanding of science.

razumijevanja znanosti.

And when we expand our radius,

A kad širimo radijus,

it's not about making a better future,

ne radi se samo o poboljšanju budućnosti,

but it's about preserving life as we know it.

nego o očuvanju života kakvog poznajemo.

So as we think about expanding our own radius in understanding science,

I dok razmišljamo o proširivanju našeg radijusa razumijevanja znanosti,

it's critical for Athens, Georgia, for Atlanta, Georgia,

ključno je za Atenu u Georgiji, Atlantu u Georgiji,

for the state of Georgia, and for the world.

za državu Georgiju i cijeli svijet.

So expand your radius.

Stoga proširite svoj radijus.

Thank you.

Hvala.

(Applause)

(Pljesak)