How Babies Think About Danger | Shari Liu | TED

譯者: Lilian Chiu 審譯者: SF Huang

So today I'm here to talk to you about babies

今天我要來和大家談的是寶寶，

and their understanding of the world.

以及他們怎麼理解這個世界。

Specifically, their understanding of dangerous situations.

具體來說，是他們如何理解危險情況。

But first, in case you haven't interacted with a baby recently,

但首先，有些人可能 有一陣子沒有和寶寶互動了，

here are some clips of what we call typical one-year-old behavior.

以下這些影片 是典型的一歲寶寶行為。

Well, from this, you might think

嗯……（笑）

這些影片可能會讓你覺得寶寶 完全不知道什麼叫危險情況。

that babies don't understand anything about dangerous situations.

Or maybe they don't understand anything about anything.

或者他們根本什麼都不知道。

But today, I'm going to tell you five surprising things

但今天，我要告訴各位我做 此項研究時的五個驚人發現。

that I learned while I did this work.

The first surprise is that babies are really willing to do dangerous things.

第一個驚人發現是，寶寶 真的願意去做危險的事。

So these are videos captured in the lab.

這些影片是在實驗室中拍攝的。

And the finding from this work is that one-year-old babies

這項研究的發現是，一歲寶寶

are perfectly willing to walk off the edge of these steep drop offs

完全願意跨出陡峭的懸崖邊緣，

without even thinking twice.

且不假思索。

事實上，他們需要有數個月 學習走路的經驗之後，

And in fact, they need months of experience learning to walk

才會開始展現出 對這些情況的恐懼徵兆。

before they start to show any signs of fear in these situations.

So that was what I completed before I started my PhD.

那是我開始攻讀 博士學位之前完成的研究。

And so I looked at these findings and I thought,

我看著這些發現，心想，

Really? Is it really true that babies are oblivious to danger?

真的嗎？寶寶真的對危險視而不見嗎？

Or could we figure out another way to study this question?

或者，我們能不能想出 另一種方式來研究這個問題？

So the history of developmental psychology tells us that if we study babies

發展心理學的歷史告訴我們， 如果我們研究寶寶的方法

by measuring complex behaviors,

是藉由測量其複雜的行為表現，

we might miss out on hidden truths about their minds.

我們可能會忽略了他們真正的想法。

So what should we do instead?

那我們該改用什麼方法？ 另一種方法是問他們，

Well, another way is, we can ask them what they think

when other people are put into the same situation.

怎麼看待身處同樣情況的其他人。

From the first months of life,

在出生的前幾個月，

babies have expectations about the world,

寶寶就對世界有所預期，

that objects are solid and don't float in mid-air,

比如物體是固態的， 且不會漂浮在半空中，

that people have intentions and goals.

以及人會有意圖和目標。

最能清楚呈現他們 有什麼預期的時刻，

And their expectations are often clearest

when they themselves are looking at the events

是他們從旁觀角度看事件，

rather than participating in them.

而不是親自參與其中時。

So that's going to be surprise number two.

那就是第二個驚人發現。

If you test babies at the same age as I just showed you,

如果針對跟剛才年齡相同的寶寶 用第二種方式做試驗，

in the second way,

you see a completely different pattern of results.

會看到完全不同的結果模式。

So, here is an example of one of our stimuli.

以下這個例子是我們 用的刺激方式之一。

And babies are going to see someone else, this red guy in the middle,

寶寶會看到別人， 也就是中間這個小紅人，

face choice: to jump left or jump right.

面臨一個抉擇：向左跳或向右跳。

Now intuitively, you can recognize that one of these choices

各位根據直覺就可以知道 其中一個選擇比另一個更危險。

is more dangerous than the other.

Falling in the ditch on the left would be a lot worse.

落入左邊的溝裡會很慘。

在其他條件都相同的情況下， 或許這個紅色的傢伙會向右。

So all else being equal, maybe this red guy is going to go right.

對寶寶，我們想了解的問題是： 他們能否區分出差別？

And the question for babies was: can they make that distinction,

and do they have that same expectation?

他們都有同樣的預期嗎？

So here we're measuring how long babies look at each of these outcomes.

在此我們測量的是寶寶 花多少時間去看每一種結果。

And the simple logic of this measure is that babies,

此種測量方法背後的簡單邏輯是： 寶寶，其實是各年齡層的人，

and indeed people of all ages,

tend to pay more attention to what's surprising.

傾向會比較注意 讓他們感到驚訝的事物。

In this case, when the red guy does the more dangerous thing.

在這個例子中，指的就是 小紅人做出比較危險的事。

So here's what we found.

我們的發現如下。

I'm plotting looking time on seconds on the vertical axis

圖上縱軸代表的是觀看的秒數，

and in red is the average looking

紅色是平均的觀看時間，

when babies saw the more dangerous choice, in green,

綠色是寶寶看到比較危險的選擇，

and the safer choice, in pink.

粉紅是比較安全的選擇。

So indeed, they look longer when someone chooses a dangerous thing

所以，的確，有人做出 危險行為時，他們的觀看時間

over a safe thing.

會比安全行為更久。

But in contrast, the very same babies responded completely differently

但相對之下，同樣 這些寶寶看到有同樣障礙

when they saw these very, very similar control videos

且極度相似的對照影片時， 反應卻全然不同，

with the same obstacles,

except this time there are no characters in the scene,

唯一的差別在於此時場景中 沒有人物，也就沒有危險。

so there's no danger at all.

And this suggests that they're not responding to the obstacles themselves,

這意味著，寶寶對於 障礙本身並沒有反應，

and they're actually really responding to the danger

他們其實是對障礙 所造成的危險有所反應。

that's imposed by the obstacles.

So that's the second surprise.

這是第二個驚人發現。

Babies do understand something about dangerous situations,

寶寶確實對危險情況有些了解，

but remember, based on their own choices, this is shocking.

但別忘了， 依據的是他們自己的選擇，

這點十分驚人，我們並不 預期一歲小孩會在乎

We wouldn't expect a one-year-old to care about the distinction

掉落的深度很深或很淺的區別。

between a deep versus a shallow drop at all.

但用這種測量方式可知， 當別人面臨同樣抉擇時，

But measured in this way, babies are making exactly that distinction

when someone else faces the same choice.

寶寶就是能做出這種區別。

So surprise number three is that this finding generalizes

第三個驚人的發現是， 上述皆為一般性狀況，

regardless of whether babies are tested in sterile lab environments like this,

不論寶寶接受測試的地方 是像這樣的無菌實驗室環境，

an empty room with nothing else but our videos to look at

也就是什麼都沒有 只有影片可以看的空房間，

and cluttered home environments.

或零亂的居家環境。

So in the middle of this work, COVID hit

研究做到一半，新冠肺炎來襲， 各地的發展心理學家

and developmental psychologists everywhere scrambled to figure out

倉促地思考有什麼辦法 可以收集資料。

whether data collection was even possible.

If you ask me, I would have predicted definitely not.

如果問我，我會預測說 不可能收集到資料。

There's a reason that we conduct studies in the lab.

我們在實驗室裡做研究是有原因的。

Our movies can be projected to these huge screens,

我們可以將影片投影到大型螢幕上，

we can minimize distraction,

我們能把干擾減到最低， 我們可以取得非常精確

we can get highly precise,

high-definition videos of where the babies are looking.

且解析度極高的錄影 來分析寶寶在看什麼。

但我們認為我們還是得試試。

But we figured we had to try.

So after a long process of figuring out exactly how to do this,

經過漫長的過程，我們想出了辦法，

we ended up calling, video calling families at home,

我們最後是用視訊通話的方式 聯絡在家中的家人，

and they played the same movies for babies on their laptop screens.

他們用自己的筆記型電腦 播放同樣的影片給寶寶看，

And we measured their looking behaviors just like before.

我們沿用之前的方式來測量 寶寶的觀看行為。

So let's just pause and take stock of all the differences between these two setups.

讓我們暫停一下，先想想 這兩種安排方式的所有差別。

In many ways, this was doomed to fail.

在許多層面上，研究都注定失敗。

I certainly thought it was going to fail, but that's not what happened.

我認為肯定會失敗， 但實情並非如此。

So on the left are the results I just showed you,

左邊是寶寶在實驗室中接受 測試的結果，剛才給各位看過，

with babies tested in the lab,

and on the right is the same experiment we repeated

右邊是我們針對另一群 在家中的寶寶做同樣的實驗。

in a new group of babies tested at home.

And as you can see, the main results look remarkably similar.

各位可以看見， 主要的結果意外地相似。

So that was surprise number three.

那是第三個驚人的發現。

This finding is similar regardless of whether babies are tested in the lab

不論寶寶是在實驗室或家中 接受測試，結果都很相似。

or at home.

So I just want to pause and state how non-trivial

我想停下來說明一下，在我的領域， 這現象是非常重大且具突破性的。

and actually really groundbreaking this was for my field.

My prediction, that we cannot study babies using these measures at home,

我本來預測，我們不能在家中 用這種測量方式來研究寶寶，

wasn't true at all.

結果完全錯誤。

And during this process,

在這個過程中，我們不僅發現 這些研究方式完全可行，

we learned not only that these studies can work at all,

but that they can actually work really well.

效果還相當好。

And at the end of the day, this process was just easier and faster for everyone.

歸根究底，這個過程對每個人 而言都更容易且更快速。

So we ended up being able to collect video data faster than ever before,

結果我們收集影片資料的 速度比以前更快，

which actually required us to engineer new tools for processing the data.

實際上我們還需要 設計新工具來處理這些資料。

So here I'm showing you a tool we built that can find a baby's face,

這是我們打造的工具，

透過網路攝影機拍攝他們的 研究影片，找出寶寶的臉孔，

given a webcam of their study

and detect where they're looking as good as a human can,

並偵測他們看哪個方向， 效果不輸給由真人來做。

that is robust, even for these very fuzzy,

即使這些網路攝影機拍的影片 模糊且品質不佳，結果一樣穩健。

low-quality webcam videos.

So this whole experience was amazing for our team.

對我們的團隊來說， 這段經歷真的太不凡了。

And for me, this experience is its own achievement.

對我來說，這段經歷本身 就是一種成果。

It took families and scientists working together

每個家庭和科學家同心協力一起

to figure out how to study baby minds in a changing world.

想辦法在不斷變動的 世界中研究寶寶的想法。

So that was surprise number four.

那是第四個驚人的發現。

The pandemic, rather than delaying and maybe ending the work in my field,

疫情並沒有延遲或終結我在 這個領域的研究，反而加速了它。

actually accelerated it.

I never would have tried online research had COVID not happened,

若不是新冠肺炎出現， 我絕不會嘗試線上研究。

但我們嘗試了，反而大大 擴展了我們研究能觸及的範圍。

but now that we've tried it,

it's vastly expanded the reach of our work.

These tools enable us to study babies anywhere in the world

這些工具讓我們能研究世界上 任何有網路的地方的寶寶。

with an internet connection.

It lets us work with families of varying demographics,

它讓我們能研究各種 不同背景特性的家庭，

and it lets us more easily access clinical populations

也讓我們更容易接觸到 很難觸及的臨床族群。

that can be harder to reach.

So the last surprise, surprise number five.

最後，第五個驚人的發現。

我一直在告訴各位，寶寶會花 較長時間去看選擇危險行為的人，

All along I've been telling you that babies look longer

when someone chooses a dangerous action

or are willing to do really dangerous things,

或者願意去做相當危險的事，

when I probably should have said "on average."

我應該要說「平均而言」。

平均而言，我們測試的寶寶 花比較多時間看Ｘ，

On average,

the babies we tested look longer at X,

on average, babies are willing to do Y.

平均而言，寶寶願意做Ｙ。

So to illustrate this point,

為了說明這一點， 這是各位先前看過的圖，

here are the same graphs I showed you before,

but hidden in these graphs, and in all the data sets from my field,

但在這些圖及我這領域中 所有資料集的背後都隱藏著

are vast individual differences.

是巨大的個體差異。

So now I've added back all the raw data that you didn't see before.

現在我把各位之前沒看到的 所有原始資料都加回來。

Now each pair of points is a baby.

每一組點都代表一個寶寶。

And as you can see, there's striking variability between babies

各位可以看見，寶寶之間 有著非常大的差異，

that average out to an effect.

平均起來成為一種效應。

Now to be clear,

我要澄清，我不認為 這會破壞研究的結論。

I don't think this undermines the conclusion of the work.

關鍵的預測在於， 在家中和在實驗室中

The key prediction is that at home and in the lab,

babies are sensitive to something about these dangerous situations.

寶寶都對這些危險情況 有一定的敏感度。

But one remaining puzzle from my field

但我的領域中還有一個謎團未解，

is what these individual differences mean.

那就是，這些個別差異的意義為何？

So one answer is, that's just measurement noise.

其中一個答案是：那只是測量雜訊。

We're studying babies,

我們在研究寶寶， 他們無法聽從指示，

they can't follow directions, they have short attention spans,

他們的注意力不持久，基本上 他們想看多久就能看多久。

they're free to basically look as long as they want.

So maybe these differences don't mean anything.

也許這些個別差異沒有意義。

It's just random noise.

只是隨機的雜訊。

A second answer is that part of these differences is driven by external factors.

第二個答案是：有部分的 個別差異是外在因素造成的。

So maybe, for our online sample,

也許，針對我們線上的樣本，

the babies who showed the biggest effects had the biggest screens to look at,

表現出最大反應的寶寶

是因為有最大的螢幕可看 或最清楚的網路連線。

or maybe the clearest internet connections.

And the third answer, maybe the one that's the most interesting,

第三個答案可能是最有趣的，

那就是，這些差異反應出 這些寶寶真正的差異。

is that these differences reflect something that's true

about the actual differences between these babies.

So for example, suppose that we put babies from this looking time study

舉例來說，如果我們把這項 觀看時間研究的寶寶放到

in the physical situations that I showed you

一開始演講時我展示 給各位看的實體情況中。

from the beginning of the talk.

Remember, there are individual differences in those experiments too.

別忘了，在這些實驗中也有個別差異。

So a question could be, would the babies who show the strongest effects here

所以，其中一個問題是， 在此展現出最強烈反應的寶寶

本身剛好也是比較有可能害怕 且避免去做危險動作的寶寶？

be the ones who also are more likely to be afraid

and avoid doing the dangerous things themselves?

And similarly, are the babies who do not show an effect here

同樣的，在此沒有展現出反應的寶寶

the ones that are willing to kind of boldly plunge into the abyss?

正是願意大膽跳入深淵的寶寶？

So to be clear, I don't know which one of these answers is right,

讓我澄清一下，我不知道 哪個答案是對的，

but I think it's important to show this variability in our papers

但我認為重要的是在我們的 論文中呈現出這種變化，

and to study them.

並去研究它們。

So I think that these challenges are actually tractable,

我認為這些難題是可以解決的，

in part because of the tools that were delivered by the pandemic.

部分是因為疫情所提供的工具。

So stay tuned and maybe I'll have an answer for you

所以，敬請期待，也許我們下次 見面時我就能告訴各位答案。

next time we see each other.

So that's the last surprise, certainly a surprise for me,

那是最後的驚人發現，

對我這個一開始只看平均行為 長條圖的人而言肯定是驚人的，

who started out looking at bar plots of average behaviors

and assuming that most babies behave the same.

我那時只假設所有 寶寶的行為都相同。

Instead, there's variability in human development

事實卻是不論我們怎麼測量， 人類發育都存在有差異，

on just about any measure we can make,

on just about any topic we can study,

不論研究什麼主題，從對身體的 理解到語言學習，也都是如此。

from physical understanding to language learning.

And making sense of these individual differences,

而能夠理解這些個別的差異，

telling apart the signal from the noise,

進而把信號和雜訊給區分出來，

continues to be a challenge and an opportunity for my field.

對我這個領域而言， 仍然是個難題和機遇。

So the next time you look into the eyes of a baby,

所以下次當你看著寶寶的眼睛時，

know that there's way more going on in their minds and brains

要知道他們心智與大腦的 運作遠超過你的想像。

than you might think.

So, zooming out to the big picture,

所以，從整體來看，大家想想 這些發現在心智起源上的意涵。

let's think about what these findings tell us

about the origins of the mind.

So to me, these findings, and many other findings from our field,

對我而言，這些發現， 及我們領域中的其他發現，

告訴我們寶寶對於社交 及實體世界具有抽象的知識。

tell us that babies have abstract knowledge

about the social and the physical world.

他們能感知並推理他們從未 見過的事件，像這些刺激，

They can perceive and reason about events that they've never seen before,

like these stimuli,

they can represent not only what happened

它們代表的不僅是發生了什麼事，

but what could happen next,

還有接下來可能發生的事，或 也許可能發生但沒發生的事。

or maybe what could have happened but didn't.

And early in development, babies are learning to solve these two

寶寶在發育早期會學習解決 這兩個非常難的問題。

really, really hard problems.

The first problem of connecting other people's actions

第一個問題是將他人的動作連結到

to their physical situations and hidden mental states.

他們的身體情況和背後的心理狀態。

And also the second hard problem of figuring out how to act in the world

還有第二個難題，是要根據他們 已知的來決定在世界上如何行事。

given what they know.

So of course, that's both an interpretation and a hypothesis.

當然，這是一種詮釋， 也是一種假設。

We have a lot to learn about these profoundly intelligent minds.

對這些極其聰明的心智， 我們還有很多要學習的。

And actually, the magic of that process reminds me a lot of a one-year-old.

事實上，這個過程的魔力 會讓我想起一歲孩童，

Falling over, having a long look at the obstacles before us

摔倒了，花很長的時間 看著我們面前的障礙，

and then taking a big leap.

接著邁出一大步。

Thank you.

謝謝。

(Applause)

（掌聲）