So I want to start by offering you a free no-tech life hack, and all it requires of you is this: that you change your posture for two minutes. But before I give it away, I want to ask you to right now do a little audit of your body and what you're doing with your body. So how many of you are sort of making yourselves smaller? Maybe you're hunching, crossing your legs, maybe wrapping your ankles. Sometimes we hold onto our arms like this. Sometimes we spread out. (Laughter) I see you. So I want you to pay attention to what you're doing right now. We're going to come back to that in a few minutes, and I'm hoping that if you learn to tweak this a little bit, it could significantly change the way your life unfolds.
首先我要提供你們一個免費的 不涉科技的生活小撇步 你只要 改變你的姿勢二分鐘 在我說明前,我要先請大家 先檢視一下你的姿態 你們之中有多少人縮著身體? 或許你現在駝著背 交叉著雙腳,或者腳踝互勾著 有時我們會這樣抱著手臂 有時我們張開雙臂(笑聲) 我看到囉(笑聲) 現在請大家專心在自己身上 我們等一下在回到這件事上 希望你們可以稍微改變一下 這會讓你的生活變得很不一樣
So, we're really fascinated with body language, and we're particularly interested in other people's body language. You know, we're interested in, like, you know — (Laughter) — an awkward interaction, or a smile, or a contemptuous glance, or maybe a very awkward wink, or maybe even something like a handshake.
所以,我們深為身體語言著迷 特別是 別人的身體語言 你知道,當我們為 (笑聲) 尷尬的互動,或微笑 或輕蔑的一瞥,或不自然的眨眼
Narrator: Here they are arriving at Number 10.
甚至是握手這樣的一件事
This lucky policeman gets to shake hands with the President of the United States. Here comes the Prime Minister -- No. (Laughter) (Applause)
(影片旁白):他們抵達 英國首相官邸唐寧街10號 幸運的警員可以和美國總統握手 噢,還有
(Laughter) (Applause)
來自....的首相? 不 (笑聲) (掌聲) (笑聲) (掌聲)
Amy Cuddy: So a handshake, or the lack of a handshake, can have us talking for weeks and weeks and weeks. Even the BBC and The New York Times. So obviously when we think about nonverbal behavior, or body language -- but we call it nonverbals as social scientists -- it's language, so we think about communication. When we think about communication, we think about interactions. So what is your body language communicating to me? What's mine communicating to you?
所以一個握手,或不握手 我們都可以聊上好幾個禮拜 即使 BBC 和紐約時報也不例外 我們說到非語言行為或身體語言時 我們社會科學學者 將之歸類為非口語語言 它就是一種語言 所以我們會想到溝通 當我們想到溝通,我們就想到互動 所以你現在的身體語言正在告訴我甚麼? 我的身體又是在傳達甚麼給你們?
And there's a lot of reason to believe that this is a valid way to look at this. So social scientists have spent a lot of time looking at the effects of our body language, or other people's body language, on judgments. And we make sweeping judgments and inferences from body language. And those judgments can predict really meaningful life outcomes like who we hire or promote, who we ask out on a date. For example, Nalini Ambady, a researcher at Tufts University, shows that when people watch 30-second soundless clips of real physician-patient interactions, their judgments of the physician's niceness predict whether or not that physician will be sued. So it doesn't have to do so much with whether or not that physician was incompetent, but do we like that person and how they interacted? Even more dramatic, Alex Todorov at Princeton has shown us that judgments of political candidates' faces in just one second predict 70 percent of U.S. Senate and gubernatorial race outcomes, and even, let's go digital, emoticons used well in online negotiations can lead you to claim more value from that negotiation. If you use them poorly, bad idea. Right?
有很多理由讓我們相信 這是有效的切入點 社會科學家花了很多時間 研究我們的身體語言 或其他人的身體語言在判斷方面的效應 而我們根據他人的身體語言 推論並做出快速又決絕的判斷 這些判斷可以幫我們 預測生命裡很有意義的事件 像是要雇用誰,邀請誰出去約會 舉例而言,Tufts 大學的研究員 Nalini Ambady 讓我們看到 當人們觀看一段 30 秒的無聲影片 是醫師和病人的真實互動 他們對該醫師是否和善的觀感 可用來預測該醫師日後 是否會被病人告上法庭 跟這個醫師稱職與否沒有太大關係 而是我們喜不喜歡他 以及他們如何互動 更戲劇化的是,普林斯頓 Alex Todorov 的研究告訴我們 我們在一秒內 對政治人物臉部的喜好判斷 預測美國參議院和州長的選舉結果 竟然 70% 準確 甚至在數位的領域裡 在線上協商時,妥善運用表情符號 可以讓你在協商中獲得較多價值 假如你運用不得當,不妙!對吧?
So when we think of nonverbals, we think of how we judge others, how they judge us and what the outcomes are. We tend to forget, though, the other audience that's influenced by our nonverbals, and that's ourselves. We are also influenced by our nonverbals, our thoughts and our feelings and our physiology.
想到非口語語言時 我們就想到判斷別人 別人如何判斷我們,以及結果 我們往往忘記,還有其他人 也受到我們非口語語言影響 那就是我們自己 我們也被自己的非口語語言所影響: 我們的想法、感覺和生理狀況
So what nonverbals am I talking about? I'm a social psychologist. I study prejudice, and I teach at a competitive business school, so it was inevitable that I would become interested in power dynamics. I became especially interested in nonverbal expressions of power and dominance.
所以我說的究竟是甚麼樣的非口語語言? 我是一位社會心理學家,我研究偏見 我在一所競爭激烈的商學院教書 因此無可避免地對權力間互動關係著迷 特別是在非口語語言表達方面的 權力和支配
And what are nonverbal expressions of power and dominance? Well, this is what they are. So in the animal kingdom, they are about expanding. So you make yourself big, you stretch out, you take up space, you're basically opening up. It's about opening up. And this is true across the animal kingdom. It's not just limited to primates. And humans do the same thing. (Laughter) So they do this both when they have power sort of chronically, and also when they're feeling powerful in the moment. And this one is especially interesting because it really shows us how universal and old these expressions of power are. This expression, which is known as pride, Jessica Tracy has studied. She shows that people who are born with sight and people who are congenitally blind do this when they win at a physical competition. So when they cross the finish line and they've won, it doesn't matter if they've never seen anyone do it. They do this. So the arms up in the V, the chin is slightly lifted.
展示權力和支配的非口語語言又為何呢? 嗯,讓我細細道來 在動物世界裡,權力和支配的 非口語語言講究擴展 所以你盡可能得把自己變大 你伸展身體 占滿空間,基本上就是開展身體 就是關於展開身體 整個動物世界都是如此 不僅限於靈長類 人類也幹同樣的事(笑聲) 兩者皆是:不論是長期習於掌權 或只在當下覺得權力強大 特別有趣的原因是它真實地呈現 古今世界權力的展現從來是如此地一致 這是「自豪」的表現 Jessica Tracy 研究顯示 視力正常的人 和先天視障的人 在贏得比賽時都做同樣的事 當他們跨過終點線贏得比賽之際 無論他們是否曾看過這種行為 他們都展現這個姿勢 雙臂呈 V 字型朝上,下巴微揚
What do we do when we feel powerless? We do exactly the opposite. We close up. We wrap ourselves up. We make ourselves small. We don't want to bump into the person next to us. So again, both animals and humans do the same thing. And this is what happens when you put together high and low power. So what we tend to do when it comes to power is that we complement the other's nonverbals. So if someone is being really powerful with us, we tend to make ourselves smaller. We don't mirror them. We do the opposite of them.
那我們感到無助的時候呢? 我們做完全相反的事 我們縮起身體,把自己捲曲起來 讓自己變得小一點 最好別碰到身旁的人 我再重複一次,人類和動物都一樣 這是在權力不對等時發生的狀況 在不對等權力狀態下 我們傾向和對方互補 若有人對我們展現權力 我們傾向把自己縮小些 我們不模仿他們 我們背道而馳
So I'm watching this behavior in the classroom, and what do I notice? I notice that MBA students really exhibit the full range of power nonverbals. So you have people who are like caricatures of alphas, really coming into the room, they get right into the middle of the room before class even starts, like they really want to occupy space. When they sit down, they're sort of spread out. They raise their hands like this. You have other people who are virtually collapsing when they come in. As soon they come in, you see it. You see it on their faces and their bodies, and they sit in their chair and they make themselves tiny, and they go like this when they raise their hand.
當我在課堂上觀察這麼現象時 我發現了甚麼? 我發現 MBA 的學生 把權力的非口語語言部分 表達得淋漓盡致 你會看到有些人就像動物群裡 支配的雄性的變形 上課前大搖大擺走進教室 一屁股坐在教室正中 好像他們真的要占據整個空間似的 當他們坐下的時候,身體會展開 舉手時會像這樣把手高舉起來 另有些人基本上是一進來就癱在那裡 他們一進來,你立刻從 他們的臉上表情和身體姿勢發現 他們坐在椅子上,把自己縮得小小的 舉手的時候是這種畏畏縮縮的樣子
I notice a couple of things about this. One, you're not going to be surprised. It seems to be related to gender. So women are much more likely to do this kind of thing than men. Women feel chronically less powerful than men, so this is not surprising.
我觀察到兩點: 第一,不出所料 這跟性別有關 女人比男人更會顯得畏縮 長期以來女人都不覺得像男人那麼強勢 所以這並不太讓人意外
But the other thing I noticed is that it also seemed to be related to the extent to which the students were participating, and how well they were participating. And this is really important in the MBA classroom, because participation counts for half the grade.
但第二件我觀察到的 這種表現似乎跟學生的參與程度 與參與程度有多好相關 在 MBA 的課堂上來說這真的非常重要 因為參與的表現占成績的一半
So business schools have been struggling with this gender grade gap. You get these equally qualified women and men coming in and then you get these differences in grades, and it seems to be partly attributable to participation. So I started to wonder, you know, okay, so you have these people coming in like this, and they're participating. Is it possible that we could get people to fake it and would it lead them to participate more?
商學院一直以來都為 男女生在參與上的差別傷腦筋 入學的時候男女生不分軒輊 可是成績出來卻反映性別差異 而看起來一部分原因和參與有關 所以我開始思考,好吧 這群人一開始來是這副樣子 看起來積極參與 那是不是可能讓大家先假裝成那樣 進而影響他們,能更積極參與?
So my main collaborator Dana Carney, who's at Berkeley, and I really wanted to know, can you fake it till you make it? Like, can you do this just for a little while and actually experience a behavioral outcome that makes you seem more powerful? So we know that our nonverbals govern how other people think and feel about us. There's a lot of evidence. But our question really was, do our nonverbals govern how we think and feel about ourselves?
我在 Berkeley 的主要合作研究夥伴 Dana Carney 和我都很想知道 是不是能先假裝,到最後則成真 譬如說,先小小假裝一陣子 然後在實際行為上經驗到 你看來很有權力的樣子的結果 我們知道非口語語言 影響他人對我們的看法 已經有很多證據 但我們真正的問題是 非口語語言是否影響 我們對自己的看法與感覺?
There's some evidence that they do. So, for example, we smile when we feel happy, but also, when we're forced to smile by holding a pen in our teeth like this, it makes us feel happy. So it goes both ways. When it comes to power, it also goes both ways. So when you feel powerful, you're more likely to do this, but it's also possible that when you pretend to be powerful, you are more likely to actually feel powerful.
確實有證據支持這個說法 舉例來說,我們開心的時候會微笑 但同樣地,當我們口中咬住一支筆 強迫呈現微笑的表情時 像這樣,我們也會感到開心 這互相影響 權力亦是如此 感到很有權力時你比較會這樣做 但你也可能假裝自己很有權力 然後真的覺得自己力量強大
So the second question really was, you know, so we know that our minds change our bodies, but is it also true that our bodies change our minds? And when I say minds, in the case of the powerful, what am I talking about? So I'm talking about thoughts and feelings and the sort of physiological things that make up our thoughts and feelings, and in my case, that's hormones. I look at hormones. So what do the minds of the powerful versus the powerless look like? So powerful people tend to be, not surprisingly, more assertive and more confident, more optimistic. They actually feel they're going to win even at games of chance. They also tend to be able to think more abstractly. So there are a lot of differences. They take more risks. There are a lot of differences between powerful and powerless people. Physiologically, there also are differences on two key hormones: testosterone, which is the dominance hormone, and cortisol, which is the stress hormone.
那第二個問題就是 我們知道心理狀態會影響身體 那身體是否能影響心理呢? 這裡所說的心理充滿力量 指的是甚麼? 我指的是想法和感覺 和構成我們想法和感受的生理因素 我這裡是指荷爾蒙。所以我針對荷爾蒙來看 充滿力量或充滿無力感 在荷爾蒙層面上有什麼差別? 不出乎意料,感覺自己有力的人往往 比較果斷,自信,且樂觀 他們確切認為機會永遠站在他們這邊 他們也較擅長抽象思考 還有許多差異。這種人比較敢承受風險 強勢的人與充滿無力感的人真的差別很大 在生理上有二個重要的荷爾蒙對此有影響 一是睪固酮:也就是支配性荷爾蒙 一是腎上腺皮質醇:也就是壓力荷爾蒙
So what we find is that high-power alpha males in primate hierarchies have high testosterone and low cortisol, and powerful and effective leaders also have high testosterone and low cortisol. So what does that mean? When you think about power, people tended to think only about testosterone, because that was about dominance. But really, power is also about how you react to stress. So do you want the high-power leader that's dominant, high on testosterone, but really stress reactive? Probably not, right? You want the person who's powerful and assertive and dominant, but not very stress reactive, the person who's laid back.
我們發現到 靈長類裡的強勢男性 有大量的睪固酮和低量的腎上腺皮質醇 強勢,高效能的領袖人物 也有大量睪固酮與低量的腎上腺皮質醇 這表示甚麼? 當你想到權力 人們往往只想到睪固酮 因為它代表支配統治 但力量其實也和如何處理壓力有關 所以你會想見一個有支配地位強勢領袖 有著很多睪固酮但同時又對壓力反應過度嗎? 大概不會吧,不是嗎?你會希望那個人 是充滿力量,肯定果斷,非常強勢 但也不會對壓力反應過度,不能輕鬆以對
So we know that in primate hierarchies, if an alpha needs to take over, if an individual needs to take over an alpha role sort of suddenly, within a few days, that individual's testosterone has gone up significantly and his cortisol has dropped significantly. So we have this evidence, both that the body can shape the mind, at least at the facial level, and also that role changes can shape the mind. So what happens, okay, you take a role change, what happens if you do that at a really minimal level, like this tiny manipulation, this tiny intervention? "For two minutes," you say, "I want you to stand like this, and it's going to make you feel more powerful."
靈長動物的社群階級裡,如果一個強勢雄性 想要奪權,如果一個雄性突然想要爭取 首領這個角色 幾天內,他體內的睪固酮一定急速增加 而其腎上腺皮質醇劇烈地減少 身體影響心理,由此可證 至少就表面而言是如此 同時角色的轉換也會影響心理 所以,如果你改變角色 如果你做一個微小改變會怎樣 像這樣的操作,這樣一個小小的干預? "持續二分鐘"你說,"我要你們這樣站著, 它會讓你感到更充滿力量"
So this is what we did. We decided to bring people into the lab and run a little experiment, and these people adopted, for two minutes, either high-power poses or low-power poses, and I'm just going to show you five of the poses, although they took on only two. So here's one. A couple more. This one has been dubbed the "Wonder Woman" by the media. Here are a couple more. So you can be standing or you can be sitting. And here are the low-power poses. So you're folding up, you're making yourself small. This one is very low-power. When you're touching your neck, you're really protecting yourself.
接著我們就決定做這個實驗。 我們將人們帶進實驗室做個小實驗 這些人將擺出有權勢的姿態 或無力的姿態兩分鐘,現在我們一起看 這五種姿勢,雖然他們只做了其中二種 這是其一 再兩個姿勢 這個姿勢是媒體一般稱為 "神力女超人" 的姿態 還有這兩個 或站或坐 這些是無助的姿勢 你雙手交叉,試著讓自己變小一點 這張顯現非常無助的樣子 當你摸脖子
So this is what happens. They come in, they spit into a vial, for two minutes, we say, "You need to do this or this." They don't look at pictures of the poses. We don't want to prime them with a concept of power. We want them to be feeling power. So two minutes they do this. We then ask them, "How powerful do you feel?" on a series of items, and then we give them an opportunity to gamble, and then we take another saliva sample. That's it. That's the whole experiment.
你其實在保護自己 實際的狀況是,他們一進來 先朝試管裡吐口口水 我們告訴他,擺這個姿勢,兩分鐘 他們不會看到姿勢的照片,因為我們不想要暗示,影響他們 我們要他們自己感覺力量 不是嗎? 所以他們擺了二分鐘姿勢 然後,我們拿一堆東西,問他們: "現在你覺得自己多有力量?" 受試者接著會有一個博奕的機會 接著再取一次唾液樣本 就是這樣。這就是整個實驗
So this is what we find. Risk tolerance, which is the gambling, we find that when you are in the high-power pose condition, 86 percent of you will gamble. When you're in the low-power pose condition, only 60 percent, and that's a whopping significant difference.
我們發現到風險承擔能力,用賭博來衡量 擺出有權勢姿勢的人 有 86% 會選擇賭博 擺低權勢姿態的人呢 只有 60% 會賭,這兩者間差異真的很大
Here's what we find on testosterone. From their baseline when they come in, high-power people experience about a 20-percent increase, and low-power people experience about a 10-percent decrease. So again, two minutes, and you get these changes. Here's what you get on cortisol. High-power people experience about a 25-percent decrease, and the low-power people experience about a 15-percent increase. So two minutes lead to these hormonal changes that configure your brain to basically be either assertive, confident and comfortable, or really stress-reactive, and feeling sort of shut down. And we've all had the feeling, right? So it seems that our nonverbals do govern how we think and feel about ourselves, so it's not just others, but it's also ourselves. Also, our bodies change our minds.
我們發現 這些人進來的那一刻起,擺高權勢姿態的人 睪固酮會上升 20% 擺低權勢姿態的人則是下降 10% 所以,再說一次,只有兩分鐘,就有這種差異 擺有權勢姿態的人 腎上腺皮質醇下降 25%, 擺低權勢姿態的人腎上腺皮質醇則上升 15% 只要二分鐘可以讓這些荷爾蒙產生這種改變 使你的腦袋成為 果斷、自信和自在 或高度緊張以及感到 退縮。我們都曾有過這些體驗不是嗎? 看來非口語的語言確實掌控 我們對自己的想法感受 不只是影響別人,更影響我們自己
But the next question, of course, is, can power posing for a few minutes really change your life in meaningful ways? This is in the lab, it's this little task, it's just a couple of minutes. Where can you actually apply this? Which we cared about, of course. And so we think where you want to use this is evaluative situations, like social threat situations. Where are you being evaluated, either by your friends? For teenagers, it's at the lunchroom table. For some people it's speaking at a school board meeting. It might be giving a pitch or giving a talk like this or doing a job interview. We decided that the one that most people could relate to because most people had been through, was the job interview.
同時,我們的身體可以改變心理 但下一個問題,當然,就是 維持數分鐘的姿勢 是否真能影響你的人生? 剛剛都只是在實驗室哩,一個小實驗,你知道的, 只有幾分鐘。這有什麼地方可以應用呢? 這才是我們關心的 我們認為什麼時候可以應用呢? 我們相信是在評量的情況下可用 像是社交威脅的情境裡,在你被人評估的時候 也許是你朋友評估你?就像是是青少年吃午餐的餐桌上那緊張樣 有些人可以應用在學校董事會演講時 可能是提出宣揚一個主張 或是像現在一樣的演講裡用 或是找工作面試時,都用的上 我們認為一般人最能認同體會的情境 因為大部分人都曾經歷過 也就是求職面試
So we published these findings, and the media are all over it, and they say, Okay, so this is what you do when you go in for the job interview, right?
我們發表這個結論,媒體大肆炒作 他們說,好吧,所以你去求職面試時, 你得這樣做,對吧? (笑聲)
(Laughter)
我們當然大吃一驚,表示
You know, so we were of course horrified, and said, Oh my God, no, that's not what we meant at all. For numerous reasons, no, don't do that. Again, this is not about you talking to other people. It's you talking to yourself. What do you do before you go into a job interview? You do this. You're sitting down. You're looking at your iPhone -- or your Android, not trying to leave anyone out. You're looking at your notes, you're hunching up, making yourself small, when really what you should be doing maybe is this, like, in the bathroom, right? Do that. Find two minutes. So that's what we want to test. Okay? So we bring people into a lab, and they do either high- or low-power poses again, they go through a very stressful job interview. It's five minutes long. They are being recorded. They're being judged also, and the judges are trained to give no nonverbal feedback, so they look like this. Imagine this is the person interviewing you. So for five minutes, nothing, and this is worse than being heckled. People hate this. It's what Marianne LaFrance calls "standing in social quicksand." So this really spikes your cortisol. So this is the job interview we put them through, because we really wanted to see what happened. We then have these coders look at these tapes, four of them. They're blind to the hypothesis. They're blind to the conditions. They have no idea who's been posing in what pose, and they end up looking at these sets of tapes, and they say, "We want to hire these people," all the high-power posers. "We don't want to hire these people. We also evaluate these people much more positively overall." But what's driving it? It's not about the content of the speech. It's about the presence that they're bringing to the speech. Because we rate them on all these variables related to competence, like, how well-structured is the speech? How good is it? What are their qualifications? No effect on those things. This is what's affected. These kinds of things. People are bringing their true selves, basically. They're bringing themselves. They bring their ideas, but as themselves, with no, you know, residue over them. So this is what's driving the effect, or mediating the effect.
我的天啊,不不不,我們不是這個意思 不管甚麼原因,不不,千萬別這麼做 這和你跟別人交談無關 這是你和你自己心理對談 你在面試工作之前做甚麼? 你會這樣 對吧? 你會做下來,你盯著自己的 iPhone 手機 或安卓手機,我們可不想漏掉哪個 你看著自己的筆記 你把自己蜷縮起來,試著讓自己變得小一點 你真正需要做的應該是 到洗手間,然後這樣,花個二分鐘 所以我們想測試的是這個 把人帶進實驗室 他們再擺高權勢或低權勢的姿態 接著進行一個高度壓力的求職面試 為時五分鐘。全程錄影 他們同時也被評論,而這些考官都接受過訓練 不會給予任何非語言的回饋 所以他們看起來就像這樣,想像一下 這個人正在面試你 整整五分鐘,甚麼都沒有,這比刁難詰問更難受 大家都不喜歡這種方式。這就是 Marianne LaFrance 所謂的 "陷入社交流沙中" 這可以大大激發你的腎上腺皮質醇 我們給予受試者這種面試 然後看結果如何 我們找了四個打分數的人看這些面試錄影 他們不知假設前提和也不了解測試的條件 沒有人知道誰擺甚麼樣的姿勢 最後他們觀看這些帶子 然後他們說,"噢,我們想要錄用這些人" 也就是那些擺高權勢姿勢的人-- "這些人我們不想錄用" 我們對這些人的整體印象也比較正面 但背後的原因是甚麼? 跟演講的內容無關 而是他們把自己帶進了演講裡 我們也衡量一些其他的變數 和能力有關,像是演講的結構好不好 它有多棒? 講者的學經歷? 全都無關。有影響的是 這些事。基本上人們表現出真實的自己 就他們自己 他們誠實的帶入了自己的種種意念 毫無保留 這就是背後真實的力量,或造成影響
So when I tell people about this, that our bodies change our minds and our minds can change our behavior, and our behavior can change our outcomes, they say to me, "It feels fake." Right? So I said, fake it till you make it. It's not me. I don't want to get there and then still feel like a fraud. I don't want to feel like an impostor. I don't want to get there only to feel like I'm not supposed to be here. And that really resonated with me, because I want to tell you a little story about being an impostor and feeling like I'm not supposed to be here.
所以當我告訴人們 我們的身體會改變心理,心理會改變行為 而行為會改變結果,他們回我說 "我不這麼想--聽起來好像是假的" 對嗎? 我就說,你就假裝一直到你達成目的為止。不幹,這不是我 我不想要成功後感覺像是一個騙子 我不想自己覺得自己是個假貨 我不要達成目的後,只有一種我本不該成功的感覺 我深有同感 這裡跟大家分享一個小故事 有關身為假貨,感覺我不配成功的故事
When I was 19, I was in a really bad car accident. I was thrown out of a car, rolled several times. I was thrown from the car. And I woke up in a head injury rehab ward, and I had been withdrawn from college, and I learned that my IQ had dropped by two standard deviations, which was very traumatic. I knew my IQ because I had identified with being smart, and I had been called gifted as a child. So I'm taken out of college, I keep trying to go back. They say, "You're not going to finish college. Just, you know, there are other things for you to do, but that's not going to work out for you."
在我 19 歲的時候,發生了一場很嚴重的車禍 我整個人飛出車外,滾了好幾翻 我彈出車外,頭部重傷,醒來時身處頭部復健病房 我從大學裡休學 別人告知我智商下降了 2 個標準差 就是說非常非常糟糕 我知道我的智商應該是多少,因為我以前被人家認為是很聰明的那種 小時大家都教我是資優生 當我被迫離開大學時,我試著回去 他們說都告訴我說,"你沒有辦法畢業的。 你知道,你還可以做很多其他的事啊, 但大學你是無望了。"
So I really struggled with this, and I have to say, having your identity taken from you, your core identity, and for me it was being smart, having that taken from you, there's nothing that leaves you feeling more powerless than that. So I felt entirely powerless. I worked and worked, and I got lucky, and worked, and got lucky, and worked.
我死命掙扎,我必須承認 當你自我認同感被剝奪,主要的身分認同 對我而言,我的自我認同就是聰明 不再聰明,再沒有比這個讓我更加無助的了 我感到完全的無力,我拼命地瘋狂地努力,努力再努力 幸運眷顧,再努力,幸運,再努力。 最終我大學畢業了。
Eventually I graduated from college. It took me four years longer than my peers, and I convinced someone, my angel advisor, Susan Fiske, to take me on, and so I ended up at Princeton, and I was like, I am not supposed to be here. I am an impostor. And the night before my first-year talk, and the first-year talk at Princeton is a 20-minute talk to 20 people. That's it. I was so afraid of being found out the next day that I called her and said, "I'm quitting." She was like, "You are not quitting, because I took a gamble on you, and you're staying. You're going to stay, and this is what you're going to do. You are going to fake it. You're going to do every talk that you ever get asked to do. You're just going to do it and do it and do it, even if you're terrified and just paralyzed and having an out-of-body experience, until you have this moment where you say, 'Oh my gosh, I'm doing it. Like, I have become this. I am actually doing this.'" So that's what I did. Five years in grad school, a few years, you know, I'm at Northwestern, I moved to Harvard, I'm at Harvard, I'm not really thinking about it anymore, but for a long time I had been thinking, "Not supposed to be here."
我比同儕多花了四年的時間 然後說服我的恩師,Susan Fiske 收我,讓我進入了普林斯頓 我當時覺得,我不應該在這裡 我是個冒牌貨 在我第一年演講前的那個晚上, 普林斯頓第一年的演講 大約是對 20 個人做 20 分鐘的演講。就這樣 我當時好害怕隔天被拆穿我不配當普林斯頓的學生 所以我打給她說,"我不幹了。" 她說:"你不可以不幹, 因為我賭在你身上了,你得留下。 你會留下,你得這麼做。 你要假裝你就是正牌普林斯頓學生 每個邀請你去主講的演講,你都得照辦 你得一直講一直講 即使你怕死了,腳癱了 魂不附體了,直到你發現你在說 "噢,我的天啊,我正在做這件事。 我已經成為它的一部分了,我就是正牌普林斯頓人。" 這就是說所做的,五年的研究生生涯 我在西北大學待了幾年 我後來去了哈佛,我在哈佛,我沒有在想到這件事了 但之前有很長一段時間我都在想這件事 "不配在這。不應該在這。"
So at the end of my first year at Harvard, a student who had not talked in class the entire semester, who I had said, "Look, you've gotta participate or else you're going to fail," came into my office. I really didn't know her at all. She came in totally defeated, and she said, "I'm not supposed to be here." And that was the moment for me. Because two things happened. One was that I realized, oh my gosh, I don't feel like that anymore. I don't feel that anymore, but she does, and I get that feeling. And the second was, she is supposed to be here! Like, she can fake it, she can become it.
所以哈佛第一年結束 有個整學期在課堂上沒說過一句話的學生 我曾經警告她:"你得參與融入否則你會被當" 來辦公室見我。其實我壓根就不認識她。 她進來時垂頭喪氣,她說 "我不配在這裡。" 此時此刻,我了解。就在此刻,二件事發生了。 我突然明白 天啊,我再也沒有這種感覺了。你知道嗎。 我再也不這樣感覺了,但她卻是,我懂她。 第二件事,她本來就應該在這裡! 她可以假裝,她可以成功。
So I was like, "Yes, you are! You are supposed to be here! And tomorrow you're going to fake it, you're going to make yourself powerful, and, you know --
所以我跟她說,"當然你應該! 你本來就應該在這裡!" 明天起你就假裝 你要讓自己充滿力量,
(Applause)
你將會---"(掌聲) (掌聲)
And you're going to go into the classroom, and you are going to give the best comment ever." You know? And she gave the best comment ever, and people turned around and were like, oh my God, I didn't even notice her sitting there. (Laughter)
"你要走進教室 你會發表最棒的評論。" 你知道嗎? 她就真的發表了最棒的評論 大家都回過神來,他們就好像 喔我的天啊,我竟沒有注意到她坐在那裡,你知道嗎? (笑聲)
She comes back to me months later, and I realized that she had not just faked it till she made it, she had actually faked it till she became it. So she had changed. And so I want to say to you, don't fake it till you make it. Fake it till you become it. Do it enough until you actually become it and internalize.
幾個月後她來找我,我才明白 她不僅只是假裝到她成功為止 她根本就是從假裝轉變到真實 整個人脫胎換骨 我想對大家說,不要假裝到你成功 先假裝然後終將成真。知道嗎? 持續地做直到它內化到你的骨子裡。
The last thing I'm going to leave you with is this. Tiny tweaks can lead to big changes. So, this is two minutes. Two minutes, two minutes, two minutes. Before you go into the next stressful evaluative situation, for two minutes, try doing this, in the elevator, in a bathroom stall, at your desk behind closed doors. That's what you want to do. Configure your brain to cope the best in that situation. Get your testosterone up. Get your cortisol down. Don't leave that situation feeling like, oh, I didn't show them who I am. Leave that situation feeling like, I really feel like I got to say who I am and show who I am.
最後與大家分享的是 小調整,大改變 就二分鐘 二分鐘,二分鐘,二分鐘 在你進行下一場令人緊張的評估情境之前 拿出二分鐘,試試看做這個,電梯裡, 洗手間,關上房門,就在你的桌子前 你就這麼做,規劃你的腦袋 能在壓力情境中發揮最大效益 提升你的睪固銅,降低你的腎上腺皮質醇 千萬別事後才有,噢,我沒把最好那面表現出來那種遺憾 而是留下,噢,我得以充分表現表達自己 讓他們知道我是怎麼樣的人
So I want to ask you first, you know, both to try power posing, and also I want to ask you to share the science, because this is simple. I don't have ego involved in this. (Laughter) Give it away. Share it with people, because the people who can use it the most are the ones with no resources and no technology and no status and no power. Give it to them because they can do it in private. They need their bodies, privacy and two minutes, and it can significantly change the outcomes of their life.
在這裡我想要求大家,你知道 嘗試高權勢姿勢 同時也想請求各位 把這項科學分享出去,因為它很簡單 這可不是我自大 (笑聲) 散發出去,和人分享 因為最用得到的人是那些 沒有資源和也不懂科技的人 沒有社會地位和權勢。把這個傳達給他們 因為他們私下就可以做 只需要他們的身體,隱私和二分鐘 然後這會大大地改變他們生命的結果
Thank you.
謝謝 (掌聲)
(Applause)
(掌聲)