#2# Jan 4th 2018
Sometimes, computer programs seem too human for their own good.
As a consequence, people may be embarrassed to use them
DIGITAL assistants such as Siri and Cortana are increasingly common on phones and computers. Most are designed to give their users the impression that a humanlike intelligence lies behind the program’s friendly voice. It does not, of course.
手机和电脑上的如Siri、Cortana这样的智能助手越来越普及。大多数智能助手的设计给用户一种印象，那就是在程序亲切语音的背后存在着人工智能。当然不存在。
But dozens of experiments over the years have shown that people readily（乐意） build strong bonds with computerised（计算机化） helpers which are endowed with（被赋予，天生具有） anthropomorphic （仿真，拟人）features, whether visual or vocal.
但是近些年来有几十项试验表明人们很乐意与被赋予仿真特征的计算机化助手建立强劲纽带，无论是在视觉上还是在有声方面。
Developing an emotional relationship with a piece of software can, however, cut both ways（互有利弊）.
然而，跟一款软件发展一段情感关系互有利弊。
As a study published in Psychological Science by Park Daeun, of Chungbuk National University in South Korea, and her colleagues, shows, one emotion sometimes involved in machine-human interaction is embarrassment.
根据《心理科学》杂志上发表的由韩国忠北国立大学的Park Daeun和她同事做的一项研究，该实验表明有时掺杂在人机互动中的一种情绪就是尴尬。
This, Dr Park has discovered, makes some users reluctant to ask for help from their artificially intelligent pals. Apparently, they are sheepish about doing so.
Park博士发现的尴尬这种情绪使得一些用户不愿向他们的人工智能朋友求助。显然，他们羞于这么做。
Dr Park and her team recruited 187 participants into their study. To start with each was presented with a series of statements on the malleability（延展性，可塑性） of intelligence. These included, “you have a certain amount of intelligence, and you can’t really do much to change it”, and “you can always substantially change how intelligent you are”.
Park博士和她的团队招募了187名参与者加入了他们的研究。首先给每个人展示一系列关于智力延展性的观点。包括“你有一定智商，而且你确实无法改变它”和“实质上，你总可以改变你的智商”。
Participants rated their responses to these statements on a six-point scale, on which one meant “strongly disagree” and six meant “strongly agree”. The reason for this initial test was that Dr Park knew from previous work that, in academic settings, those who believe intelligence to be malleable are comfortable asking for assistance while those who believe it to be fixed often feel ashamed to do so.
参与者将他们对这些观点的回答评为6个级别，1代表“强烈反对”，6代表“强烈同意”。初次测试的原因就是Park博士从前期的工作中得知，在学术环境下，认为智商可以延展的人对求助这一行为觉得舒坦，而认为智商已经固定的人经常羞于求助。
The initial test done, the researchers presented their volunteers with a second, which involved looking at 16 sets of three words and trying to think of a fourth word that linked them.For example, when offered “room, blood, salts” a correct answer would be “bath”. Sometimes the first three words were accompanied by an unrequested hint (in the example given, this was “tub”). Sometimes they were not.Hints appeared as the written form of the word in question, accompanied by a computer-shaped icon.
初次测试结束后，研究人员给志愿者展示了第二项测试，即注视15组单词，每组3个词，试着相处与之相关的第四个词。比如，给出“房间，血液，盐”，那么正确的答案就是“洗澡”。有时前三个单词伴有未要求的提示（在上个例子中，这个提示就是“浴缸”），有时三个词中没有提示。当问题中的单词书写形式出现提示时会伴随着一个电脑形状的图标。
For half of participants this icon had a humanlike face, and the hint was placed inside a speech bubble originating from that face, thus anthropomorphising（赋与人性，人格化） the presentation to some degree. For the other half the icon lacked a face and there was no speech bubble. After the final set of words had been displayed, participants were asked to agree or disagree with follow-up statements about their experience, such as “it was embarrassing to receive help during the task”, and “others might think I am incompetent because I received help during the task”. This time, they quantified their feelings on a seven-point scale, with higher scores representing greater feelings of unease.
对于一半参与者而言，该图标有个人形的脸，而提示就置于这张脸吐出的语言气泡内，从某种程度上将展示拟人化了。对于另一半参与者而言，该图标缺少了一张脸，也没有语言气泡。最后一组单词展示完毕后，参与者要被提问是否同意关于他们自身经历的后续观点，比如“做任务时接受帮助令人尴尬”，“别人可能认为我能力不足是因为我在做任务时接受了帮助”。这次，他们用了一个七级量表量化了情感，分值越高代表不安情绪越强烈。
The researchers found that participants who believed intelligence to be unchangeable felt more embarrassed and more incompetent after the tests. Specifically, those whose level of belief（that this is true）was more than one standard deviation（标准差） above the mean score on the six-point scale for perceptions of intelligence flexibility (in other words, the top sixth of the sample), averaged 3.2 when measured for feelings of shame and embarrassment if the computer icons they had seen giving the hints had had faces and speech bubbles, but only 2.7 if not. In contrast, people who strongly believed that intelligence could be changed over time (the bottom sixth of the sample) felt the same level of discomfort (around 2.5) whether or not the icons had been anthropomorphised.
研究人员发现认为智商不会变的参与者在测试后感到更加尴尬，更加无力。具体来说，那些认为智商不会变是真的的相信程度值比对智商灵活性认知进行测试的六级量表（也就是样本最高是六级）的平均值还高出一个标准差值的参与者在看到电脑图标给出提示时有脸和语言气泡时测试到的害羞和尴尬值平均为3.2，若没有脸和气泡，该平均值只有2.7。相反，强烈认为智商可以随着时间改变的人们不管图标有没有拟人化，他们不安的情绪值也水平相当（大约2.5）。
A second experiment, in which a different set of participants were allowed to ask for help rather than having it thrust upon（强加于） them at random had similar results. Dr Park therefore concludes that some people do, indeed, seem to wish to avoid losing face by seeking help from an icon that has, well, a face. And that in turn suggests there are circumstances when the relentless pseudo-humanisation（假的，虚伪的人性化） of machine-human interactions could usefully be curbed.
第二项实验也有类似结果。在该实验中，另一组不同的参与者可以允许求助，而非强迫随机选取的他们去求助。因此Park博士得出结论，一些人确实似乎希望通过向有着脸的图标求助来避免丢脸。这就暗示了人机互动的无情、虚伪的人性化得到控制是有益的。
网友评论