《心理新青年》对话美国心理学家Jamie Pennebaker（上篇）：我的跨界心理学之旅
引言 2020年伊始，新型冠状病毒（COVID-19）带来的肺炎疫情席卷中国，并且迅速发展为全球范围内的大流行病。再加上澳洲山火、印尼洪水、印度蝗灾，使得数以亿计的普通人们，不得不应对扑面而来的天灾人祸。人们如何应对不确定性，又如何感知风险？为什么创伤事件的影响可以几十年挥之不去？又有什么心理干预，可以适用于人群范围内大规模的心理康复吗？表达性写作（expressive writing）是其中有大量科学证据的一个潜在解决方案。在本次采访中，我们对话了美国德州大学奥斯汀分校著名心理学家Jamie Pennebaker。
本期嘉宾 Jamie Pennebaker是一名社会心理学家。他是德州大学奥斯汀分校的Centennial Liberal Arts心理学教授，并且是Academy of Distinguished Teachers的成员之一。他的研究侧重于自然语言使用、健康和社会行为之间的关系。他最近的研究是“日常语言如何反映基本的社会过程和人格”。他的谷歌学术论文引用量高达83658次。
Brief biography Jamie Pennebaker is an American social psychologist. He is the Centennial Liberal Arts Professor of Psychology at the University of Texas at Austin and a member of the Academy of Distinguished Teachers. His research focuses on the relationship between natural language use, health, and social behavior, most recently "how everyday language reflects basic social and personality processes". Jamie’s Google Scholar Citations is 83658.
Scroll down for English version↓
本期主创 本期内容由心理新青年编辑部出品。其中，李星煜采访和编辑，罗梓溪听录、翻译、校对、排版，Jamie Pennebaker团队审校。本文知识产权归《心理新青年》编辑部所有，未经授权，严禁转载。如需转载，请联系编辑部商讨授权事宜。欢迎分享到微信群和朋友圈！
本期Highlights
“直到大学快毕业，我才进入心理学这行。”
“在读博的一半时间里，我其实没有导师——这对我来说非常好。”
“对创伤经历守口如瓶其实对幸存者来说是一个更大的压力。”
“书写创伤经历对人们的身体健康有着重要的积极影响。”
“网络暴民内部对彼此都团结友爱。可他们不把自己讨厌的那些人当人看。”
“社会心理学家应该关注现实世界而非局限于实验室中的问题。”
“要花更多的时间进行跨学科合作，而不是局限于当下的研究结果能否被重复。”
《心理新青年》 您能简单地和我们分享一下您的个人经历吗？您是怎么开始心理学研究的？
Jamie Pennebaker 在我上大学的时候，我以为自己会成为一名律师，我当时还获得了音乐奖学金（吹单簧管）。我在想我是不是要进法学院。
但由于我不需要专攻一门领域，所以我不断地从一个领域跳到另一个领域。有一次我上了心理学课，我觉得心理学很有趣，所以之后我开始上更多的心理学的课程，直到我大学快毕业了我才踏入这个领域。我被心理学这个领域深深吸引了：心理学导论把心理学描绘成一门可以让我研究任何我想要研究的学科——在某种程度上心理学也确实如此。
所以我最终读了社会心理学的博士。
我最初和David Glass一起工作，他对生理有关的问题很感兴趣。我一直对生理学、学习和社会心理学都很感兴趣。他开始研究A型行为（指竞争性的、有压迫感的、有敌意的，攻击性的行为）与心脏病的关系。这就是关于一个特定的人格类型可能与一种疾病有关的想法的起点。我和他一起工作了两年，然后他离开了。之后我开始做一些我感兴趣的事情：我开始研究身体症状，人们是如何解读他们的感受，以及这与生理学的关系。
所以，在读博的一半时间里，我其实没有一个导师，这对我来说非常好。我之后找到了一份工作，继续研究了几年身体症状，并且偶然有了一个发现。
我发现某些类型的人比其他类型的人呈现更高比例的某些身体症状，比如头痛，胃不舒服等。我给数百人发了一份问卷。其中一个问题是：在17岁之前，你有过创伤性的性经历吗？
当时从来没有其他研究者问过这样的问题，结果我发现大约有15%的美国学生有大量的身体症状和健康问题。
后来一家杂志要做一份关于症状的问卷调查，他们问我要不要问些问题，我说不妨问一些关于创伤性的性经历的问题。大约有24000名读者填写了调查问卷，22%的女性和11%的男性说他们遭受过性创伤，他们有更高的可能患有癌症、高血压、感冒、流感等基本上所有的病。
这让我很疑惑，创伤性的性经历到底为什么会对健康有如此大影响？我发现这不像其他的创伤，因为没有人谈论过这种创伤的，这算是一个大秘密。之后我又做了一些研究，我发现任何创伤都很严重。
但如果人们对于创伤保守秘密，情况就更糟了。要保守秘密，不能对其他任何人讲述自己的创伤，其实会造成更大的压力。
这让我想到，如果我们把人带到实验室，让他们以某种方式表达出这个压抑的秘密，会怎样呢？
我最终得到了正确的答案。在80年代中期，我做了第一个实验，让人们来实验室，通过掷硬币来随机分组（randomization）。实验组写下四天来他们生活中最痛苦的经历，控制组写一些无关痛痒的话题。之后我们得到了实验参与者的知情同意，追踪他们看医生的的记录以及身体健康情况。
我们发现，书写创伤经历对人们的身体健康有着重要的影响。人们更少去看医生，并且在之后的几个月都更加快乐。
我的第二项研究是与Janice Kiecolt-Glaser以及她的丈夫一起开展的，我们研究的是免疫功能。我们同样发现，书写创伤经历跟增强免疫系统功能有正相关。
这两项研究真的改变了我的人生历程。
我开始做其它的课题。其它实验室也开始复制我研究的结果。我很想知道，为什么书写经历能够帮到人们。
可我发现，人们分析别人的写作内容时，并不准确。我突然想到，一个计算机程序可以很好地量化分析人们是如何使用文字的。我当时（90年代）就和在美国的语言学家、计算语言学家和计算机科学家进行沟通。
我问过他们有没有我可以直接购买的电脑程序，他们都觉得我想做的事很有趣，可又说他们并不知道有现成的这种程序。
所以我和我的一个博士生一起工作，我们编写了一个计算机程序（LIWC），它现在成为了很流行的语言学家测量词频的程序。
我们从网上下载文本数据，并进行分析，这才是真正的开始。我开始了解到语言真的很有趣。我的研究越来越深入，最初有很多阻力，但令我惊讶的是，计算机科学家们真的对我的研究话题很感兴趣，甚至一些语言学家也很感兴趣。所以，正是这个发现让我跨越了多个学科。
简而言之，这就是我走到今天这一步的故事。
《心理新青年》 您之前提到您在本科时上过很有趣的心理学课。但现如今，如果您的孩子或者您的本科生开始学习心理学，除了学到心理学的那些令人兴奋的，有趣的重要发现之外，他们还会学到“可重复性危机”（replication crisis）。他们会发现他们爱上的心理学在很多人眼里是“不可靠的，不可重复的”。您对此如何评价？
Jamie Pennebaker 我不认为强调这种危机有任何意义。
因为所谓的“可重复性危机”，其实在科学界无处不在。它存在于生物学，以及任何实验室学科中。当你使用小样本时，是否能够重复纯粹是概率问题，有时可以重复，有时则不行。如果这是一个有趣的发现，那么有研究者会尝试重复它。但如果研究者们不能重复它，它就不值得信任，那么就继续研究下一个问题。如果它能被重复，那非常好。
科学就应该是这样的，不可重复本身就是正常科学进展中的一部分。
当你采取这些步骤的时候，你必须非常谨慎，有时候你会发现一些根本不成立的东西。
在我做的第一个表达性写作研究中，我使用的样本非常小，每种情况只有10或11名参与者。我后来得到的结果是非常碰巧的。我所在的那所学校，大多数学生碰巧来自外州。所以他们唯一的医疗选择就是去校园里的学生健康中心，所以我才碰巧能记录下他们看病的数据。
我当时做实验的时间和地点都很完美，所以研究有了结果。虽然仅在P = 0.07水平上显著，但我还是能够把论文发表了。现在，我不会再做这么小样本量的研究，因为我碰巧知道真实的效应量大约是Cohen’s d = 0.16。这个效应很小，它意味着每种条件下必须有大约50至80名被试。
但那时我在一所学校里不可能找那么多人来做实验，这完全不现实。如果我得重复两三次的话，我估计得花五年的时间才能发表第一篇论文。
《心理新青年》 Can you briefly share with us your experiences? How did you get started in psychology?
Jamie Pennebaker When I was in college, I thought I would become a lawyer, and I was also awarded a music scholarship (playing the clarinet). I wonder if I am going to law school.
But since I don't need to specialize in one field, I keep jumping from one field to another. I took a psychology class once and I thought it was very interesting, so I started to take more psychology classes. It wasn't until I graduated from college that I stepped into this field. I was deeply attracted to the field of psychology. Introduction to Psychology describes psychology as a discipline that allows me to study anything I want to study. Psychology does, to some extent.
So I ended up reading a Ph.D. in social psychology.
I originally worked with David Glass. He is interested in physiological issues. I have always been interested in physiology, learning and social psychology. He began to study the relationship between type A behavior (competitive, oppressive, hostile, aggressive behavior) and heart disease. This is the starting point for the idea that a particular personality type may be associated with a disease. I worked with him for two years and then he left. Then I started to do things that interest me. I started to study physical symptoms, how people interpret their feelings, and how this relates to physiology.
So, half of the time I was reading the blog, I didn't actually have a mentor, which was good for me. I later found a job, continued to study physical symptoms for several years, and came across a discovery.
I found that certain types of people have a higher percentage of certain physical symptoms than others, such as headaches, upset stomachs, etc. I sent a questionnaire to hundreds of people. One of the questions is: did you have a traumatic sexual experience before the age of 17?
No other researcher had ever asked such a question at the time. As a result, I found that about 15% of American students have a large number of physical symptoms and health problems.
Later a magazine did a questionnaire on symptoms. They asked me if I would ask some questions. I said I might as well ask some questions about traumatic sexual experiences. About 24,000 readers filled out the questionnaire, and 22% of women and 11% of men reported that they had suffered sexual trauma, and they were more likely to have cancer, high blood pressure, colds, flu, and basically all diseases.
This makes me wonder why traumatic sexual experience has such a big impact on health. I find this, unlike other traumas, because no one has talked about this trauma, this is a big secret. After doing some research, I found that any trauma was serious.
But it's even worse if people keep secrets about trauma. The pressure to keep secrets, not to tell others about their trauma, is actually a greater source of stress.
This reminds me of what would happen if we brought people to the laboratory and let them express this repressive secret in some way?
I finally got the correct answer. In the mid-1980s, I did my first experiment, asking people to come to the lab and randomize by flipping coins. The experimental group wrote the most painful experience of their lives in four days, and the control group wrote some unrelated topics. We then obtained informed consent from the participants and tracked their doctors' records and their health.
We have found that writing traumatic experiences has an important impact on people's physical health. People go to the doctor less often and are happier in the months to come.
My second study was conducted with Janice Kiecolt-Glaser and her husband, and we studied immune function. We also found that writing traumatic experiences were positively related to enhancing immune system function.
These two studies have really changed my life course.
I started doing other topics. Other laboratories have begun to replicate the results of my research. I would like to know why writing experience can help people.
But I found that when people judge the content of others' writing, they are not accurate. It suddenly dawned on me that a computer program can do a good job of quantitatively analyzing how people use words. I communicated with linguists, computational linguists, and computer scientists in the United States (the 1990s).
I asked them if there were any computer programs I could buy directly. They all thought what I wanted to do was fun, but they said they didn't know that there was such a program in place.
So I worked with one of my PhD students and we wrote a computer program. It (LIWC) is now a popular linguist's program for measuring word frequency.
We download text data from the Internet and analyze it. This is the real beginning. I started to learn that languages are really fun. My research is getting deeper. There was a lot of resistance initially, but to my surprise, computer scientists were really interested in my research topic, even some linguists. So it was this discovery that allowed me to cross multiple disciplines.
In short, this is the story of where I am today.
《心理新青年》 You mentioned earlier that you took an interesting psychology class while you were undergraduate. But now, if your child or your undergraduate begins to study psychology, in addition to the exciting and interesting important findings of psychology, they will learn the "replication crisis" crisis). They will find that the psychology they fall in love with is described by many as "unreliable and unrepeatable." How would you rate this?
Jamie Pennebaker I don't think it makes any sense to emphasize this crisis.
Because the so-called "repeatable crisis" is actually everywhere in the scientific community. It exists in biology, and in any laboratory discipline. When you use small samples, whether you can repeat is purely a matter of probability, sometimes it can be repeated, sometimes it can't. If this is an interesting finding, some researchers will try to repeat it. But if researchers can't repeat it, it's not trustworthy, so continue to study the next problem. If it can be repeated, that's great.
Science should be like this. It is not repeatable and is itself part of normal scientific progress.
When you take these steps, you must be very careful. Sometimes you find something that doesn't hold at all.
In the first expressive writing study I did, the samples I used were very small, with only 10 or 11 participants in each case. The results I got later were very coincident. In my school, most of the students happened to be from outside the state. So their only medical option is to go to the student health center on campus. That's why I happened to be able to record data about their visits.
The time and place where I did the experiment were perfect, so the research yielded results. Although only significant at the P = 0.07 level, I was able to publish the paper. Now, I will not do such a small sample study because I happen to know that the true effect size is about Cohen ’s d = 0.16. This effect is small, which means that there must be about 50 to 80 participants in each condition.
But at that time I couldn't find so many people in a school for experiments, which was totally unrealistic. If I had to repeat it two or three times, it would take me five years to publish my first paper.
下期预告
《心理新青年》对话美国心理学家
Jamie Pennebaker（下篇）：
心理学家应该关注真实人间，而非虚假危机
未完待续，敬请期待！
采访团队：
王浥濛，美国耶鲁大学心理学系博士生
Yishan Xu, Visiting Resident, Stanford University Medical School Sleep Center
徐艺珊，美国斯坦福大学医学院睡眠科兼职博士后
Xuan Zhao, postdoctoral researcher, University of Chicago Booth School of Business
赵轩，美国芝加哥大学布斯商学院博士后
Tingting Liu, Doctoral student, Department of Psychology, University of Michigan
刘婷婷，美国密歇根大学心理学系博士生
Anita Yanting Xu, Masters student, London School of Economics
徐彦婷，英国伦敦政治经济学院硕士生
如果你是学心理学的学生，研究心理学的学者，或者对人格与社会心理学感兴趣，都欢迎扫码加入我们的人格与社会心理学学术交流群：
感谢各位的关注和支持！期待大家的反馈和建议！
更多精彩心理学家系列专访即将陆续推出发布！
长期关注我们请扫描以下二维码