英语专业八级考试(TEM-8)的选材主要来自英美报刊杂志、广播电台或网站。其中一个包括：TED演讲，2018和2016年专八听力讲座(Mini-lecture)就来自TED演讲。建议大家平时多看多听TED演讲。
演讲者：Merve Emre
演讲题目: How do personality tests work?
In 1942, a mother-daughter duo Katherine Cook Briggs and Isabel Briggs Myers developed a questionnaire that classified people’s personalities into 16 types. Called the Myers-Briggs Type Indicator, or MBTI, it would go on to become one of the world’s most widely-used personality tests.
1942年，一对母女组合凯瑟琳·库克·布里格斯和伊莎贝尔·布里格斯·迈尔斯编制了一份问卷，将人们的性格分为16种类型。它被称为迈尔斯-布里格斯类型指标（MBTI），它将成为世界上使用最广泛的人格测试之一。
Today, personality testing is a multi-billion dollar industry used by individuals, schools, and companies. But none of these tests, including the MBTI, the Big Five, the DiSC assessment, the Process Communication Model, and the Enneagram, actually reveal truths about personality. In fact, it’s up for debate whether personality is a stable, measurable feature of an individual at all.
今天，人格测试已经发展成个人、学校和公司都在使用的价值数十亿美元的项目。但是，这些测试，包括MBTI，五大测试，DiSC评估，过程沟通模型和ennegram，都没有真正揭示人格的真相。事实上，人格是否是一个稳定的、可测量的个体特征，这是一个有待讨论的问题。
Part of the problem is the way the tests are constructed. Each is based on a different set of metrics to define personality: the Myers-Briggs, for instance, focuses on features like introversion and extroversion to classify people into personality "types," while the Big Five scores participants on five different traits.
部分问题在于测试的构造方式。每一种都是基于一套不同的标准来定义个性的：例如，迈尔斯-布里格斯研究小组就注重内向和外向等特征，将人分为性格“类型”，而五大得分小组则对参与者的五种不同特征进行评分。
Most are self-reported, meaning the results are based on questions participants answer about themselves. So it’s easy to lie, but even with the best intentions, objective self-evaluation is tricky.
大多数是自我报告的，这意味着结果是基于参与者对自己回答的问题。所以撒谎很容易，但即使是出于好意，客观的自我评价也很棘手。
Take this question from the Big Five: How would you rate the accuracy of the statement "I am always prepared"?
请回答五大问题：你如何评价“我随时准备好”这句话的准确性？
There’s a clear favorable answer here, which makes it difficult to be objective. People subconsciously aim to please: when asked to agree or disagree, we show a bias toward answering however we believe the person or institution asking the question wants us to answer.
这里有一个明确的有利答案，这就很难做到客观。人们下意识的目标是取悦：当被要求同意或不同意时，我们表现出对回答的偏见，但我们相信提出问题的人或机构希望我们回答。
Here’s another question— what do you value more, justice or fairness? What about harmony or forgiveness?
还有一个问题——你更看重什么，正义还是公平？和谐还是宽恕呢？
You may well value both sides of each pair, but the MBTI would force you to choose one. And while it’s tempting to assume the results of that forced choice must somehow reveal a true preference, they don’t: When faced with the same forced choice question multiple times, the same person will sometimes change their answer.
你可能很看重每一对的两面，但是MBTI会迫使你选择一对。尽管人们很容易认为强迫选择的结果一定会揭示出一种真正的偏好，但事实并非如此：当多次面对同一个强迫选择问题时，同一个人有时会改变答案。
Given these design flaws, it’s no surprise that test results can be inconsistent.
考虑到这些设计缺陷，测试结果不一致也就不足为奇了。
One study found that nearly half of people who take the Myers-Briggs a second time only five weeks after the first get assigned a different type. And other studies on the Myers-Briggs have found that people with very similar scores end up being placed in different categories, suggesting that the strict divisions between personality types don’t reflect real-life nuances.
一项研究发现，在第一次服用迈尔斯-布里格斯药五周后，有将近一半的人被分配了一种不同的类型。其他关于迈尔斯-布里格斯的研究发现，得分非常相似的人最终被分为不同的类别，这表明人格类型之间的严格划分并不能反映现实生活中的细微差别。
Complicating matters further, the definitions of personality traits are constantly shifting. The Swiss psychiatrist Carl Jung, who popularized the terms introvert and extrovert, defined an introvert as someone who sticks to their principles regardless of situation, and an extrovert as someone who molds their self according to circumstance.
更复杂的是，人格特征的定义在不断变化。瑞士精神病学家卡尔·荣格普及了内向者和外向者这两个词，他将内向者定义为不管情况如何都坚持原则的人，而外向者是指根据环境塑造自己的人。
Introversion later came to mean shyness, while an extrovert was someone outgoing. Today, an introvert is someone who finds alone time restorative, an extrovert draws energy from social interaction, and an ambivert falls somewhere between these two extremes.
内向后来意味着害羞，而外向的人是外向的人。今天，内向者认为独处时间可以恢复精力，外向者从社会交往中汲取能量，而矛盾者则介于这两个极端之间。
The notion of an innate, unchanging personality forms the basis of all these tests. But research increasingly suggests that personality shifts during key periods— like our school years, or when we start working. Though certain features of a person’s behavior may remain relatively stable over time, others are malleable, moulded by our upbringing, life experiences, and age.
先天不变的人格是所有这些测试的基础。但越来越多的研究表明，性格在关键时期会发生变化，比如在我们上学的时候，或者我们开始工作的时候。虽然一个人行为的某些特征可能会随着时间的推移保持相对稳定，但其他一些特征是可塑的，受我们的成长、生活经历和年龄的影响。
All of this matters more or less depending on how a personality test is used. Though anyone using them should take the results with a grain of salt, there isn’t much harm in individual use— and users may even learn some new terms and concepts in the process. But the use of personality tests extends far beyond self discovery.
所有这些或多或少都取决于人格测试的使用方式。尽管使用它们的人应该对结果持怀疑态度，但个人使用没有太大的危害-用户甚至可以在这个过程中学习一些新的术语和概念。实际上，人格测试的应用远远超出了自我发现。
Schools use them to advise students what to study and what jobs to pursue. Companies use them decide who to hire and for what positions. Yet the results don’t predict how a person will perform in a specific role.
学校用它们来指导学生学习什么和从事什么工作。公司利用它们来决定雇佣谁和担任什么职位。然而，研究结果并不能预测一个人在特定角色中的表现。
So by using personality tests this way, institutions can deprive people of opportunities they’d excel at, or discourage them from considering certain paths.
因此，通过这种方式使用人格测试，机构可以剥夺人们的机会，他们最是擅长或劝阻他们考虑某些发展方向。
【 特别 声明 】 本公众平台除特别注明原创或授权转载外，其他文章均为转载，版权 归原作者或平台所有，出于传递信息之目的，并没有任何商业目的。 本公号尊重知识产权，如无意中侵犯了您的权益，请及时联系后台，本公号将及时删除。
TED学院合集
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
8
9
10
11
热门跟贴