医学考博英语阅读 | 人工智能和心理学，现在电脑可以给你看病了
小白老师说：复习的时间，真的是过一天就少一天。要么读，要么听，要么写，每天总得学点英语。不要让宝贵的备考时光虚度。紧跟“医学考博阅读”栏目，撸起袖子加油干！
欢迎大家在文章下方的留言里打卡，请回答，“人工智能”用英语怎么说？
你的任务：
1. 扫清生词。今天这篇文章没什么难词，很容易读。
2. 把握作者观点、行文逻辑。
3. 摘录两到三个实用的、可套用到写作中的句式。
点这里轻轻打开音频▼
Artificial intelligence and psychology
人工智能和心理学
The computer will see you now
现在电脑能给你看病了
A virtual shrink may sometimes be better than the real thing
有时候，虚拟缩小版反而比实际事物更好
ELLIE is a psychologist, and a damned good one at that. Smile in a certain way, and she knows precisely what your smile means. Develop a nervous tic or tension in an eye, and she instantly picks up on it. She listens to what you say, processes every word, works out the meaning of your pitch, your tone, your posture, everything. She is at the top of her game but, according to a new study, her greatest asset is that she is not human.
Ellie 是一名心理学家，而且长于此道。面带职业化微笑的她，清楚地知道你每个笑容的含义。即便是简单的神经抽搐或者眼神紧张，她也能立刻注意到这个细节。她仔细聆听你的表达，分辨每一个字词，研究你每个音调、口音、手势等所有小动作的含义。最新研究认为，她处在行业顶端的最大优势在于，她不是人类。
When faced with tough or potentially embarrassing questions, people often do not tell doctors what they need to hear. Yet the researchers behind Ellie, led by Jonathan Gratch at the Institute for Creative Technologies, in Los Angeles, suspected from their years of monitoring human interactions with computers that people might be more willing to talk if presented with an avatar.
当面临艰难决定，或可能尴尬的问题的时候，人们一般并不会告诉医生他需要听到的内容。然而来自洛杉矶的创新技术研究所的研究人员，在 Jonathan Gratch 的领导下，根据多年使用电脑监控人际交流的结果，认为人们更愿意对着虚拟头像吐露真心。
To test this idea, they put 239 people in front of Ellie to have a chat with her about their lives. Half were told they would be interacting with an artificially intelligent virtual human; the others were told that Ellie was a bit like a puppet, and was having her strings pulled remotely by a person.
为测试这一想法，他们请了 239 人同Ellie当面交流他们的生活。其中一半被告知实情，即他们同人工智能在互动；同时误导另外一半，告诉他们 Ellie 就像是一个傀儡，被某个人远程操控。
Designed to search for psychological problems, Ellie worked with each participant in the study in the same manner. She started every interview with rapport-building questions, such as, “Where are you from?” She followed these with more clinical ones, like, “How easy is it for you to get a good night's sleep?” She finished with questions intended to boost the participant's mood, for instance, “What are you most proud of?” Throughout the experience she asked relevant follow-up questions—“Can you tell me more about that?” for example—while providing the appropriate nods and facial expressions.
为研究心理问题而设计的 Ellie 以相同的方式同每个参与者互动。每次会谈她都以拉家常的问题开始，比如“你从哪儿来？” 然后继以更医学性的问题，比如 “你晚上睡眠质量如何？” 最后她的问题会刺激参与者的情绪，比如 “你最骄傲的事是什么？” 在整个过程中，她会问到相关的后继问题，比如 “能不能多聊聊这个？” 同时还会适时地点头，做出恰当地面部表情。
Lie on the couch, please.
请躺到沙发上。
During their time with Ellie, all participants had their faces scanned for signs of sadness, and were given a score ranging from zero to one. Also, three real, human psychologists, who were ignorant of the purpose of the study, analysed transcripts of the sessions, to rate how willingly the participants disclosed personal information.
在与 Ellie 共处的时候，所有的参与者的面部都会被扫描，以寻找悲伤的特征，并评以 0 到 10 分。同时，三位真正的人类心理学家，在对此研究的目的一无所知的情况下，分析会谈的视频，并排出参与人员披露个人信息的意愿。
These observers were asked to look at responses to sensitive and intimate questions, such as, “How close are you to your family?” and, “Tell me about the last time you felt really happy.” They rated the responses to these on a seven-point scale ranging from -3 to +3. All participants were also asked to fill out questionnaires intended to probe how they felt about the interview.
这些观察人员要注意对敏感而亲密的问题的回答，比如 “你同你家庭有多亲密？” 和 “告诉我你上次觉得真的高兴是什么时候。” 他们根据七分制对这些回答进行排序，-3 表明完全不愿意表露信息，+3 表示非常愿意。所有的参与人员也要填写调查问卷，以说明他们对此次会谈的感觉。
Dr Gratch and his colleagues report in Computers in Human Behaviour that, though everyone interacted with the same avatar, their experiences differed markedly based on what they believed they were dealing with. Those who thought Ellie was under the control of a human operator reported greater fear of disclosing personal information, and said they managed more carefully what they expressed during the session, than did those who believed they were simply interacting with a computer.
Gratch 博士及其同事在《人类行为同电脑》上报道称，尽管每个人都与同一个头像进行互动，他们的体验却显著地取决于他们认为自己所交流的对象。同认为仅仅是同电脑互动的人相比，那些认为 Ellie 是在人类控制下的参与者更担心揭露个人信息，并认为在会谈期间，他们对表达的内容更细心在意。
Crucially, the psychologists observing the subjects found that those who thought they were dealing with a human were indeed less forthcoming, averaging 0.56 compared with the other group's average score of 1.11. The first group also betrayed fewer signs of sadness, averaging 0.08 compared with the other group's 0.12 sadness score.
重要的是，监测这一过程的心理学家发现，那些认为是在同人类交流的参与者，确实更内向。相比于另一组的 1.11 的平均值，他们的平均值仅为 0.56。第一组同样泄露出了较少的悲伤特征，平均 0.08，而另一组的悲伤得分为 0.12。
This quality of encouraging openness and honesty, Dr Gratch believes, will be of particular value in assessing the psychological problems of soldiers—a view shared by America's Defence Advanced Research Projects Agency, which is helping to pay for the project.
Gratch 博士认为，鼓励开放和诚实的质量将在评估军人的心理学问题过程中起到重要作用。这一观点得到了美国国防高级研究计划局的认同。后者同时也是此项目的赞助方。
Soldiers place a premium on being tough, and many avoid seeing psychologists at all costs. That means conditions such as post-traumatic stress disorder, to which military men and women are particularly prone, often get dangerous before they are caught. Ellie could change things for the better by confidentially informing soldiers with PTSD that she feels they could be a risk to themselves and others, and advising them about how to seek treatment.
军人对表现坚强尤其看重，而且许多人竭力避免去看心理医生。然而许多军人都很容易产生创伤后应激障碍的问题。这意味着在发现的时候，往往这一问题已经变得危险。Ellie 能够改变这一现状，秘密通知她认为患有创伤后应激障碍的军人可能对患者自身及其他人构成威胁，并建议他们如何寻求治疗。
If, that is, a cynical trooper can be persuaded that Ellie really isn't a human psychologist in disguise. Because if Ellie can pass for human, presumably a human can pass for Ellie.
这一切的前提是，玩世不恭的兵哥哥要相信 Ellie 真的不是伪装了的人类心理学家。毕竟如果 Ellie 能够欺骗人类，那人类也能欺骗他。
点击下方蓝字回顾更多内容▼
长按上图二维码可购魔法书，微店考博网络课程火热报名中