返回正常中文阅读
想对这篇译文“指手画脚”吗？
大错 
小错 
不顺 
建议 Why we think we're better than the rest - it's not all vanity
Ask any driver how skilled they are at the wheel and they're bound to say they're above average (even though a large proportion of drivers must, by definition, be below average). This is just one example of what psychologists call a "self-serving bias" or the "above average" effect. It's part of the general tendency most of us have to view ourselves in a particularly favourable light.
The obvious, egocentric explanation for why we do this is that it makes us feel better about ourselves. But there are at least two other more innocent explanations, which are based on subtle flaws in our thinking.
The first possibility is that we find it easier to consider the favourable evidence for a single person than we do for a whole group. Consistent with this is the finding that people tend to be biased when comparing any single individual, not just themselves, against a group of others.
There's also the possibility that we're biased towards the "target" in any comparison. The "target" is the entity that is being measured up against some benchmark. Following this logic, if I asked you how good all other drivers are compared with you (thus making other drivers the "target" of the comparison and you the benchmark), then this ought to reduce the bias you'd show towards yourself.
A new study has tried to get to the bottom of what causes the "above average effect" by pitching these three explanations against each other. Zlatan Krizan and Jerry Suls Dozens asked dozens of undergraduates to list a group of friends or acquaintances, to take one member of that group and then compare that individual with the rest of the group on some attribute - say, generosity.
The researchers varied the contribution of the three factors thought to cause the "above average effect" by altering whether the student or another individual was the target of the comparison, by varying whether the student was or wasn't left among the remaining group members to be compared against, by varying the size of the group, and by switching whether it was the group or the individual who was the target of the comparison.
The researchers' conclusion after inviting the students to perform all these comparisons was that the obvious egocentric explanation for the "above average" effect is actually far weaker than has previously been assumed.
For example, asked to compare the generosity of an individual with the generosity of the rest of the group, students still showed a preferential bias toward the individual, even if they were themselves one of the members of the rest of the group. This remained true even if the group (which the student was themselves a member of) was made the target of a comparison against an individual. In other words, it is the difficulty we have thinking about the favourable evidence for groups, as opposed to individuals, that seems to be the crucial factor underlying the "above average effect".
_________________________________
我们为何认为比别人强 ---并非全是虚荣心
问问任何一个驾驶员他们的驾驶技术如何，他们一定都说中等偏上.(即使大部分驾驶者准确地说是中等偏下)这正是心理学家们所说的"自私的偏见" 或是 "中等偏上" 效应的例子。我们绝大多数人以一特别有利的眼光来看我们自己，这是种普遍的趋向。
我们为什麽这么做 ，表面上自我为中心的原因就是“它使我们对我们自己感觉更良好”。但是至少还有二种基于我们思虑问题出现细小的差错带来的更无辜的原因。
第一可能性是我们对待单个人时，更容易考虑其有利因素，而我们对待一个群体时则，怎不然。 当把任何一个单个人与另一群体作对比时,人们会偏向这个单个人。事情就是这样。
另一种可能就是我们偏向比较的"目标" 。"目标" 是拿来与参照物作比较的实体。 按照这个逻辑, 如果我问你其他驾驶者与你相较怎么样( 这样就让其他驾驶者成了比较的 "目标"，你成了基点),那麽这应该会减少你表现出来的对自己的偏袒。
一项新的研究通过把这三种原因作彻底分析，试图弄清造成“中等偏上效应"的根本原因是什么。 赖坦 克里（ZlatanKrizan）和杰里苏尔兹（JerrySuls）要求几十个大学生列举出一群朋友，或是熟人,并挑出该群体中的一员为例，然后拿这单个人和该群体的其他人在某个方面作个比较：比如说在慷慨性方面作个比较。
通过控制是让学生或是别的个体成为比较的目标：或者通过调控该学生是否包括在拿来作比较的剩余的群体之中；或者通过控制该群体的规模；再或者通过控制比较的目标是群体还是个人，研究人员对过去认为是造成“中等偏上效应”的三个因素有了不同看法。
在邀请的学生作完所有比较之后，研究人员得出的结论是：造成"中等偏上效应"的 明显的自我为中心的心理因素实际上远比先前预计的要弱。
举例来说, 当要求把个人的慷慨与该团体其他人的慷慨作比较是，学生们仍然会表现出对单个人的偏向,即使他们自己是该团体其馀者的一员。 即使该团体 ( 该学生是他们内部的一员) 被拿来作为与一个个人的比较的目标，结论也还是那样。
换句话说，我们为一个群体，去思考有利的证据,有困难： 而为单个人则不然，这看来是造成“中等偏上效应”的主要因素。
