VOA英语学习网 > 科学美国人 > 2022年科学美国人 > 科学美国人60秒科学系列 >
缩小放大

科学美国人60秒:你觉得这像一张脸吗?

[提示:]双击单词,即可查看词义!
中英对照 听力原文

Karen Hopkin: This is Scientific American’s 60-Second Science. I’m Karen Hopkin.

这里是《科学美国人》的 60 秒科学。我是凯伦霍普金。

Hopkin: It’s probably happened to you. You look at a parking meter or a pickle slice or the foam in your cup of cappuccino and you think, hey, that looks like a face. It’s a phenomenon called pareidolia and it’s something we humans tend to do.

你可能也遇到过,在盯着停车收费器、黄瓜切片或是卡布奇诺上的奶泡时,你会突然想到,哎,有张人脸呢!这一现象被称为空想性错视(pareidolia),是我们人类会干出的事儿。

Now, a new study suggests we also do something else: we tend to see those illusory faces as having a gender….and most often we think they’re male. The finding appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Susan G. Wardle et al., Illusory faces are more likely to be perceived as male than female.]

如今,一项新研究表明,我们还会干另一件事:我们倾向于认为这些虚幻的人脸有性别,通常情况下都是男性。该发现结果发表在《美国科学院院刊》(PNAS)上。[Susan G. Wardle 等人,虚幻的面孔更容易被认为是男性而不是女性。]

Susan Wardle: Growing up my sister Jenny and I had our own word for examples of face pareidolia: “beezups.”

我和一起长大的姐妹珍妮专门用一个词来称呼那些空想性错视看到的脸——beezup。

Hopkin: Susan Wardle, a cognitive neuroscientist at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda. Her term is total nonsense. But Wardle must have felt some connection with beezups. As a grownup, she set out to study them after a conversation she had with her colleague Jessica Taubert.

苏珊·沃德尔(Susan Wardle),贝塞斯达国立卫生研究院的认知神经科学家。beezups一词完全没有意义。但她一定是感受到了这个现象,如今长大成人的沃德尔某次与同事杰西卡·陶伯特(Jessics Taubert)交谈之后,开始着手研究这个现象。

Wardle: We were talking about face neurons in the brain, which respond preferentially to images of faces. But they also sometimes respond to pictures of round objects, such as apples or clocks. That reminded us of the experience of seeing faces in objects. And we thought it would be fun to find out whether the face regions of the brain respond to illusory faces in a similar way to real faces.

我们当时在讨论大脑中优先响应人脸图片的面孔神经元。这些神经元有时也会对圆形物体图片作出反应,例如苹果或者时钟。这让我们想到在物体中看到人脸的经历。我们想知道,这些面孔神经元对错视面孔和对真人面孔的响应机制是否一致。

Hopkin: Indeed, in an earlier study, they found that the same brain regions activated by actual human faces were also triggered by faux faces in inanimate objects, like potatoes or teapots or washing machines. But that made them wonder: what do we see in these illusory faces?

在此前的一项研究中,她们发现真实人脸和无生命物体(例如土豆、茶壶或者洗衣机)上的假脸会激活相同的脑区。但她们也很好奇:在这些假脸上我们到底看到了什么?

Wardle: For example, do these faces appear to be of a particular age or gender? And do they have a specific emotional expression?

例如,这些脸是否具有特定的年龄或者性别?是否传递着一种特别的情绪?

Hopkin: So they set out to collect a variety of images.

于是,团队着手收集各种图片。

Wardle: We started by finding examples of face pareidolia on the internet. Now, people send us their own examples. And we also take photos of illusory faces that we see out in the world.

一开始,我们从在网上搜寻人脸错视的图例,现在,人们会把自己看到的错视图发送给我们,我们自己在外面看到类似人脸的物体时也会拍下来。

Hopkin: They showed 250 of these photos to some thirty-eight hundred volunteers.

他们向大约3800名志愿者展示了其中的 250 张照片。

Wardle: And we found that people readily attribute these features to illusory faces. For example, a given illusory face might look like a fearful young boy or a grumpy older woman.

我们发现,人们非常容易赋予看到的虚幻人脸一些特征,比如,把它看作一个惊恐的小男孩,或者脾气暴躁的老妇人。

Hopkin: But most striking of all…

但最让人意外的是……

Wardle: …there was a strong bias for people to perceive illusory faces as male rather than female.

在性别上,人们非常倾向于将虚幻的人脸认作男性而非女性。

Hopkin: About four times as often, the researchers found.

研究人员发现,把虚幻人脸认作男性面孔的概率是女性面孔的四倍。

Wardle: And this was the case for both female and male participants.

女性和男性参与者都是如此。

Hopkin: So it wasn’t just that men saw Mr. Potato Head everywhere they looked. It also wasn’t tied to the type of object in question…like a hammer versus a handbag.

所以,把任何东西都看作“土豆头先生”的不只是男性。这一倾向与物体类型也无关,无论是锤子还是手提包。

Wardle: And the male bias persists when the faces are shown in black and white, so it’s not due to gender associations with color, either.

当面孔以黑白显示时,男性偏见仍然存在,所以这也不是由于性别与颜色的关系。

Hopkin: Obviously none of these fake faces has a biological sex.

显然,这些假脸本身都没有生物性别。

Wardle: Which means there is no reason for us to perceive them to have a particular gender. The fact that we do shows the illusory faces also engage our social perception system.

因此,我们没有理由认为它具有特定的性别,事实上,我们发现虚幻人脸的识别涉及到了我们的社会感知系统。

Hopkin: And the reason we default to seeing males is that our brains need more information before we see a face as female. Think of a smiley face emoji.

而我们默认人脸是男性的原因是,对我们的大脑来说,女性面孔的识别需要更多信息。让我们想象一下微笑的小黄脸表情。

Wardle: Most people would probably say that it looks more male than female. The addition of other details, such as eyelashes and hair, is used to make emojis look more female. The same is true of Lego characters.

大部人可能认为它看起来更偏男性而非女性,再加上其他细节,例如眼睫毛和头发,它看上去才会更像女性。乐高积木人也是同样的道理。

Hopkin: The fact that we’re so quick to see faces in couch cushions and tree trunks and slices of bread…gender assignments aside…is maybe not all that surprising. The same thing happens to monkeys…creatures who are also hard-wired for making social connections.

另外,抛开性别不谈,我们很容易在沙发靠垫上、树干上,以及面包片上看出人脸这一点,或并不令人非常意外。猴子身上也会发生同样的事情,这些动物天生就能建立社会关系。

Wardle: And it suggests that we see illusory faces because, like other social primates, our brains are so tuned into faces, we don’t want to miss a single face in the environment, even if that means occasionally making a mistake.

这表明,人类和其他社会性灵长类动物之所以能看到虚幻的人脸,是因为大脑对面孔非常敏感,我们不想错过环境中的任何一张脸,即使这意味着偶尔也会看走眼。

Hopkin: Seems the potential benefit of gaining a friend is worth more than the potential cost of losing face.

如此看来,找到“朋友”的潜在好处,胜过“ 丢脸”的潜在损失。

For Scientific American’s 60-Second Science, I’m Karen Hopkin.

以上是《科学美国人》的60秒科学,凯伦·霍普金报道。

Karen Hopkin: This is Scientific American’s 60-Second Science. I’m Karen Hopkin.

Hopkin: It’s probably happened to you. You look at a parking meter or a pickle slice or the foam in your cup of cappuccino and you think, hey, that looks like a face. It’s a phenomenon called pareidolia and it’s something we humans tend to do.

Now, a new study suggests we also do something else: we tend to see those illusory faces as having a gender….and most often we think they’re male. The finding appears in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences. [Susan G. Wardle et al., Illusory faces are more likely to be perceived as male than female.]

Susan Wardle: Growing up my sister Jenny and I had our own word for examples of face pareidolia: “beezups.”

Hopkin: Susan Wardle, a cognitive neuroscientist at the National Institutes of Health in Bethesda. Her term is total nonsense. But Wardle must have felt some connection with beezups. As a grownup, she set out to study them after a conversation she had with her colleague Jessica Taubert.

Wardle: We were talking about face neurons in the brain, which respond preferentially to images of faces. But they also sometimes respond to pictures of round objects, such as apples or clocks. That reminded us of the experience of seeing faces in objects. And we thought it would be fun to find out whether the face regions of the brain respond to illusory faces in a similar way to real faces.

Hopkin: Indeed, in an earlier study, they found that the same brain regions activated by actual human faces were also triggered by faux faces in inanimate objects, like potatoes or teapots or washing machines. But that made them wonder: what do we see in these illusory faces?

Wardle: For example, do these faces appear to be of a particular age or gender? And do they have a specific emotional expression?

Hopkin: So they set out to collect a variety of images.

Wardle: We started by finding examples of face pareidolia on the internet. Now, people send us their own examples. And we also take photos of illusory faces that we see out in the world.

Hopkin: They showed 250 of these photos to some thirty-eight hundred volunteers.

Wardle: And we found that people readily attribute these features to illusory faces. For example, a given illusory face might look like a fearful young boy or a grumpy older woman.

Hopkin: But most striking of all…

Wardle: …there was a strong bias for people to perceive illusory faces as male rather than female.

Hopkin: About four times as often, the researchers found.

Wardle: And this was the case for both female and male participants.

Hopkin: So it wasn’t just that men saw Mr. Potato Head everywhere they looked. It also wasn’t tied to the type of object in question…like a hammer versus a handbag.

Wardle: And the male bias persists when the faces are shown in black and white, so it’s not due to gender associations with color, either.

Hopkin: Obviously none of these fake faces has a biological sex.

Wardle: Which means there is no reason for us to perceive them to have a particular gender. The fact that we do shows the illusory faces also engage our social perception system.

Hopkin: And the reason we default to seeing males is that our brains need more information before we see a face as female. Think of a smiley face emoji.

Wardle: Most people would probably say that it looks more male than female. The addition of other details, such as eyelashes and hair, is used to make emojis look more female. The same is true of Lego characters.

Hopkin: The fact that we’re so quick to see faces in couch cushions and tree trunks and slices of bread…gender assignments aside…is maybe not all that surprising. The same thing happens to monkeys…creatures who are also hard-wired for making social connections.

Wardle: And it suggests that we see illusory faces because, like other social primates, our brains are so tuned into faces, we don’t want to miss a single face in the environment, even if that means occasionally making a mistake.

Hopkin: Seems the potential benefit of gaining a friend is worth more than the potential cost of losing face.

For Scientific American’s 60-Second Science, I’m Karen Hopkin.


内容来自 VOA英语学习网https://www.chinavoa.com/show-8817-242974-1.html
内容推荐
<