I'm going to talk to you about optimism -- or more precisely, the optimism bias. It's a cognitive illusion that we've been studying in my lab for the past few years, and 80 percent of us have it.
Govorit ću vam o optimizmu -- ili, preciznije rečeno, o sklonosti optimizmu. To je kognitivna iluzija koju smo proučavali u mom laboratoriju nekoliko proteklih godina. i koju ima 80 posto svih nas.
It's our tendency to overestimate our likelihood of experiencing good events in our lives and underestimate our likelihood of experiencing bad events. So we underestimate our likelihood of suffering from cancer, being in a car accident. We overestimate our longevity, our career prospects. In short, we're more optimistic than realistic, but we are oblivious to the fact.
To je naša sklonost precjenjivanju vjerojatnosti da ćemo doživjeti dobre događaje u našim životima i podcjenjivanju vjerojatnosti da ćemo doživjeti loše događaje. Dakle podcjenjujemo vjerojatnost da ćemo oboljeti od raka ili doživjeti prometnu nezgodu. Precjenjujemo našu dugovječnost, naš napredak u karijeri. Ukratko, više smo optimistični, nego realistični, ali nismo svjesni toga.
Take marriage for example. In the Western world, divorce rates are about 40 percent. That means that out of five married couples, two will end up splitting their assets. But when you ask newlyweds about their own likelihood of divorce, they estimate it at zero percent. And even divorce lawyers, who should really know better, hugely underestimate their own likelihood of divorce. So it turns out that optimists are not less likely to divorce, but they are more likely to remarry. In the words of Samuel Johnson, "Remarriage is the triumph of hope over experience."
Uzmite brak za primjer. U zapadnom svijetu, stopa razvoda je oko 40 posto. To znači da će dva od pet brakova završiti dijeljenjem imovine. No kada upitate mladence o vjerojatnosti raspada njihovog braka, oni je procjenjuju s nula posto. Čak i odvjetnici za brakorazvodne parnice, koji bi trebali znati bolje, uvelike podcjenjuju vjerojatnost raspada vlastitog braka. Dakle ispostavlja se da za optimiste nije manja vjerojatnost da će se razvesti, ali je veća vjerojatnost da će ponovo stupiti u brak. Riječima Samuela Johnsona, "Ponovno stupanje u brak je pobjeda nade nad iskustvom."
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
So if we're married, we're more likely to have kids. And we all think our kids will be especially talented. This, by the way, is my two-year-old nephew, Guy. And I just want to make it absolutely clear that he's a really bad example of the optimism bias, because he is in fact uniquely talented.
Ako smo u braku, veća je vjerojatnost da ćemo imati djecu. I svi mislimo kako će naša djeca biti posebno nadarena. Ovo je, usput rečeno, moj dvogodišnji nećak Guy. I želim samo naglasiti da je on uistinu loš primjer sklonosti optimizmu, jer je on stvarno iznimno nadaren.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
And I'm not alone. Out of four British people, three said that they were optimistic about the future of their own families. That's 75 percent. But only 30 percent said that they thought families in general are doing better than a few generations ago.
I ja nisam jedina koja ovako razmišlja. Troje od četvoro Britanaca su rekli kako su optimistični u vezi budućnosti svojih obitelji. To je 75 posto. Ali samo 30 posto ih je reklo kako misle da je obiteljima, općenito govoreći, bolje nego što je bilo prije nekoliko generacija.
And this is a really important point, because we're optimistic about ourselves, we're optimistic about our kids, we're optimistic about our families, but we're not so optimistic about the guy sitting next to us, and we're somewhat pessimistic about the fate of our fellow citizens and the fate of our country. But private optimism about our own personal future remains persistent. And it doesn't mean that we think things will magically turn out okay, but rather that we have the unique ability to make it so.
Ovo je vrlo važno istaknuti zato što pokazuje da smo optimistični u vezi nas samih, optimistični smo u vezi naše djece, optimistični smo u vezi naših obitelji, ali nismo toliko optimistični kada se radi o drugima, i donekle smo pesimistični kada se radi o sudbini naših sugrađana i sudbini naše države. No privatni optimizam o našoj osobnoj budućnosti ostaje trajan. To ne znači kako mislimo da će se stvari magično posložiti, već da imamo jedinstvenu sposobnost da to ostvarimo.
Now I'm a scientist, I do experiments. So to show you what I mean, I'm going to do an experiment here with you. So I'm going to give you a list of abilities and characteristics, and I want you to think for each of these abilities where you stand relative to the rest of the population.
Ja sam znanstvenica i provodim pokuse. Kako bih vam pokazala o čemu govorim, provest ću jedan pokus s vama. Dat ću vam popis vještina i karakteristika i želim da za svaku od navedenih vještina promislite gdje se nalazite u odnosu na ostatak populacije.
The first one is getting along well with others. Who here believes they're at the bottom 25 percent? Okay, that's about 10 people out of 1,500. Who believes they're at the top 25 percent? That's most of us here. Okay, now do the same for your driving ability. How interesting are you? How attractive are you? How honest are you? And finally, how modest are you?
Prva je slaganje s drugim ljudima. Tko ovdje vjeruje da se nalazi u donjih 25 posto? U redu, to je oko 10 ljudi od 1.500. Tko vjeruje da se nalazi u gornjih 25 posto? Većina nas. U redu, sad napravite isto za vašu vještinu vožnje. Koliko smatrate da ste zanimljivi? Koliko ste privlačni? Koliko ste iskreni? I naposljetku, koliko ste skromni?
So most of us put ourselves above average on most of these abilities. Now this is statistically impossible. We can't all be better than everyone else. (Laughter) But if we believe we're better than the other guy, well that means that we're more likely to get that promotion, to remain married, because we're more social, more interesting.
Dakle većina nas sebe svrstava iznad prosjeka vezano za većinu navedenih vještina. To je statistički nemoguće. Ne možemo svi biti bolji od svih drugih. (Smijeh) No ako vjerujemo da smo bolji od onog drugog to znači da imamo veću vjerojatnost da dobijemo promaknuće, da ostanemo u braku, jer smo društveniji i zanimljiviji.
And it's a global phenomenon. The optimism bias has been observed in many different countries -- in Western cultures, in non-Western cultures, in females and males, in kids, in the elderly. It's quite widespread.
Ovo je globalni fenomen. Sklonost optimizmu je primjećena u mnogim zemljama -- u zapadnim kulturama, u ne-zapadnim kulturama, kod žena i kod muškaraca, kod djece i starijih. Poprilično je raširena.
But the question is, is it good for us? So some people say no. Some people say the secret to happiness is low expectations. I think the logic goes something like this: If we don't expect greatness, if we don't expect to find love and be healthy and successful, well we're not going to be disappointed when these things don't happen. And if we're not disappointed when good things don't happen, and we're pleasantly surprised when they do, we will be happy.
No pitanje je, je li to dobro za nas? Neki kažu da nije. Neki kažu da se tajna sreće nalazi u niskim očekivanjima. Mislim da je logika iza toga otprilike ova: Ako ne očekujemo velike stvari, ako ne očekujemo da ćemo pronaći ljubav i biti zdravi i uspješni, onda nećemo biti razočarani kada se te stvari ne dogode. Ako nismo razočarani kada se dobre stvari ne dogode, a ugodno smo iznenađeni kada se dogode, bit ćemo sretni.
So it's a very good theory, but it turns out to be wrong for three reasons. Number one: Whatever happens, whether you succeed or you fail, people with high expectations always feel better. Because how we feel when we get dumped or win employee of the month depends on how we interpret that event.
Ovo je jako dobra teorija, ali ispostavlja se kako je pogrešna iz tri razloga. Prvi razlog: što god se dogodi, bilo da uspijete ili podbacite, osobe s visokim očekivanjima se uvijek osjećaju bolje. To je zato što naši osjećaji kada nas partner ostavi ili kada postanemo zaposlenik mjeseca ovise o tome kako tumačimo taj događaj.
The psychologists Margaret Marshall and John Brown studied students with high and low expectations. And they found that when people with high expectations succeed, they attribute that success to their own traits. "I'm a genius, therefore I got an A, therefore I'll get an A again and again in the future." When they failed, it wasn't because they were dumb, but because the exam just happened to be unfair. Next time they will do better. People with low expectations do the opposite. So when they failed it was because they were dumb, and when they succeeded it was because the exam just happened to be really easy. Next time reality would catch up with them. So they felt worse.
Psiholozi Margaret Marshall i John Brown su proučavali studente s visokim i niskim očekivanjima. I utvrdili su da kada ljudi s visokim očekivanjima postignu uspjeh, oni taj uspjeh pripisuju vlastitim osobinama. "Ja sam genije i zato sam dobio peticu i zato ću nastaviti dobijati petice i ubuduće." Kada bi doživjeli neuspjeh, to nije bilo zato što su glupi, već zato što je ispit taj put bio nepravedan. Idući put će biti bolje. Ljudi s niskim očekivanjima čine suprotno. Tako da kada oni dožive neuspjeh to je zato što su glupi, a kada postignu uspjeh to je zato što je ispit taj put bio uistinu lagan. Idući put će ih stvarnost sustići. Stoga se osjećaju lošije.
Number two: Regardless of the outcome, the pure act of anticipation makes us happy. The behavioral economist George Lowenstein asked students in his university to imagine getting a passionate kiss from a celebrity, any celebrity. Then he said, "How much are you willing to pay to get a kiss from a celebrity if the kiss was delivered immediately, in three hours, in 24 hours, in three days, in one year, in 10 years? He found that the students were willing to pay the most not to get a kiss immediately, but to get a kiss in three days. They were willing to pay extra in order to wait. Now they weren't willing to wait a year or 10 years; no one wants an aging celebrity. But three days seemed to be the optimum amount.
Drugi razlog: bez obzira na ishod, sam čin iščekivanja nas čini sretnima. Bihevioralni ekonomist George Lowenstein je zamolio studente sa svog sveučilišta da zamisle strastveni poljubac s bilo kojom slavnom osobom. Zatim ih je pitao: "Koliko ste voljni platiti za poljubac slavne osobe ako će vas poljubiti odmah, za tri sata, za 24 sata, za tri dana, za godinu dana ili za 10 godina? Otkrio je da su studenti najspremniji najviše platiti za poljubac koji neće dobiti odmah, već za tri dana. Bili su spremni platiti više da bi čekali. Nisu, doduše, bili spremni čekati godinu dana ili 10 godina; nitko ne želi ostarjelu zvijezdu. No tri dana se činilo idealnim razdobljem.
So why is that? Well if you get the kiss now, it's over and done with. But if you get the kiss in three days, well that's three days of jittery anticipation, the thrill of the wait. The students wanted that time to imagine where is it going to happen, how is it going to happen. Anticipation made them happy.
Zašto je tako? Zato što ako dobijete poljubac odmah, on je već povijest. No ako dobijete poljubac za tri dana, onda ćete provesti tri dana u slatkom i uzbudljivom iščekivanju. Studenti su željeli to vrijeme kako bi zamišljali gdje će se to dogoditi i kako će se dogoditi. Iščekivanje ih je činilo sretnima.
This is, by the way, why people prefer Friday to Sunday. It's a really curious fact, because Friday is a day of work and Sunday is a day of pleasure, so you'd assume that people will prefer Sunday, but they don't. It's not because they really, really like being in the office and they can't stand strolling in the park or having a lazy brunch. We know that, because when you ask people about their ultimate favorite day of the week, surprise, surprise, Saturday comes in at first, then Friday, then Sunday. People prefer Friday because Friday brings with it the anticipation of the weekend ahead, all the plans that you have. On Sunday, the only thing you can look forward to is the work week.
Ovo je, usput rečeno, razlog zašto ljudi više vole petak nego nedjelju. To je uistinu neobična činjenica s obzirom da je petak radni dan dok je nedjelja dan odmora pa biste pretpostavili da ljudi više vole nedjelju. No nije tako. Ne zato što stvarno vole biti u uredu i ne podnose šetnje parkom ili kasne doručke. To znamo zato što kad upitate ljude koji im je najdraži dan u tjednu, gle čuda, subota je na prvom mjestu, zatim petak pa onda nedjelja. Ljudi više vole petak zato što petak uključuje iščekivanje predstojećeg vikenda i svih planova za vikend. Jedina stvar kojoj se možete radovati nedjeljom je radni dan.
So optimists are people who expect more kisses in their future, more strolls in the park. And that anticipation enhances their wellbeing. In fact, without the optimism bias, we would all be slightly depressed. People with mild depression, they don't have a bias when they look into the future. They're actually more realistic than healthy individuals. But individuals with severe depression, they have a pessimistic bias. So they tend to expect the future to be worse than it ends up being.
Optimisti su dakle ljudi koji očekuju više poljubaca u budućnosti i više šetnji parkom. I to iščekivanje pojačava njihovo zadovoljstvo. Zapravo bismo, bez sklonosti optimizmu, svi mi bili blago depresivni. Osobe s blagom depresijom nemaju sklonost optimizmu kada razmišljaju o budućnosti. Oni su zapravo realniji od zdravih pojedinaca. No pojedinci koji pate od ozbiljne depresije imaju sklonost pesimizmu. Stoga zamišljaju da će budućnost biti lošija no što na kraju stvarno ispadne.
So optimism changes subjective reality. The way we expect the world to be changes the way we see it. But it also changes objective reality. It acts as a self-fulfilling prophecy. And that is the third reason why lowering your expectations will not make you happy. Controlled experiments have shown that optimism is not only related to success, it leads to success. Optimism leads to success in academia and sports and politics. And maybe the most surprising benefit of optimism is health. If we expect the future to be bright, stress and anxiety are reduced.
Dakle optimizam mijenja subjektivnu stvarnost. Naša očekivanja kako će svijet izgledati mijenjaju način na koji ga promatramo. No također mijenjaju i objektivnu stvarnost. Ona djeluju kao samoispunjavajuće proročanstvo. I to je treći razlog zašto vas smanjivanje očekivanja neće usrećiti. Kontrolirani pokusi su pokazali da optimizam nije samo povezan s uspjehom, već i da vodi uspjehu. Optimizam vodi uspjehu u akademskoj zajednici i sportu i politici. Jedna od koristi optimizma koja možda najviše začuđuje, jest zdravlje. Ako očekujemo da će budućnost biti svijetla, stres i tjeskoba se smanjuju.
So all in all, optimism has lots of benefits. But the question that was really confusing to me was, how do we maintain optimism in the face of reality? As an neuroscientist, this was especially confusing, because according to all the theories out there, when your expectations are not met, you should alter them. But this is not what we find. We asked people to come into our lab in order to try and figure out what was going on.
Tako da sve u svemu, optimizam ima puno prednosti. No ono što me uistinu zbunjivalo jest pitanje kako zadržavamo optimizam kad smo suočeni sa stvarnošću? Kao neuroznanstveniku, ovo je bilo posebno zbunjujuće je, prema svim raspoloživim teorijama, kada očekivanja nisu ispunjena, trebali bismo ih promijeniti. No to nije ono što smo otkrili. Zamolili smo ljude da dođu u naš laboratorij kako bismo pokušali shvatiti što se događa.
We asked them to estimate their likelihood of experiencing different terrible events in their lives. So, for example, what is your likelihood of suffering from cancer? And then we told them the average likelihood of someone like them to suffer these misfortunes. So cancer, for example, is about 30 percent. And then we asked them again, "How likely are you to suffer from cancer?"
Zamolili smo ih da procjene vjerojatnost da će im se dogoditi različiti užasni događaji. Pitali smo ih primjerice koja je vjerojatnost da će oboljeti od raka. A zatim smo im rekli koja je prosječna vjerojatnost za osobe poput njih da će im se dogoditi ovakve nedaće. Primjerice, vjerojatnost oboljenja od raka je 30 posto. Zatim smo ih ponovo pitali: "Kolika je vjerojatnost da ćete oboljeti od raka?"
What we wanted to know was whether people will take the information that we gave them to change their beliefs. And indeed they did -- but mostly when the information we gave them was better than what they expected. So for example, if someone said, "My likelihood of suffering from cancer is about 50 percent," and we said, "Hey, good news. The average likelihood is only 30 percent," the next time around they would say, "Well maybe my likelihood is about 35 percent." So they learned quickly and efficiently. But if someone started off saying, "My average likelihood of suffering from cancer is about 10 percent," and we said, "Hey, bad news. The average likelihood is about 30 percent," the next time around they would say, "Yep. Still think it's about 11 percent."
Željeli smo saznati hoće li ljudi upotrijebiti informaciju koju smo im dali da promjene svoja uvjerenja. I uistinu su to učinili -- no uglavnom onda kada je informacija koju smo im dali bila bolja od onog što su očekivali. Tako, na primjer, ako je osoba rekla: "Vjerojatnost da ću oboljeti od raka je oko 50 posto.", nakon čega smo mi rekli: "Čuj, imamo dobre vijesti, vjerojatnost je samo 30 posto.", u idućem krugu bi rekli: "Mislim da je moja vjerojatnost oko 35 posto." Dakle učili su brzo i učinkovito. No ako je osoba prvotno rekla: "Moja vjerojatnost da ću oboljeti od raka je oko 10 posto", nakon čega smo mi rekli: "Čuj, imamo loše vijesti, prosječna vjerojatnost je oko 30 posto", u idućem krugu bi rekli: "Da. Još uvijek mislim da je oko 11 posto."
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
So it's not that they didn't learn at all -- they did -- but much, much less than when we gave them positive information about the future. And it's not that they didn't remember the numbers that we gave them; everyone remembers that the average likelihood of cancer is about 30 percent and the average likelihood of divorce is about 40 percent. But they didn't think that those numbers were related to them.
Tako da nije da nisu uopće naučili, jesu, ali su naučili puno, puno manje nego kad smo im dali pozitivne informacije o budućnosti. I nije da nisu zapamtili brojke koje smo im naveli. Svi su zapamtili da je prosječna vjerojatnost oboljenja od raka oko 30 posto i da je prosječna vjerojatnost za razvod oko 40 posto. No nisu smatrali da se te brojke odnose na njih.
What this means is that warning signs such as these may only have limited impact. Yes, smoking kills, but mostly it kills the other guy.
To znači da upozorenja kao primjerice da pušenje ubija, mogu imati samo ograničeni učinak. Jasno je, pušenje ubija, ali nekog drugog.
What I wanted to know was what was going on inside the human brain that prevented us from taking these warning signs personally. But at the same time, when we hear that the housing market is hopeful, we think, "Oh, my house is definitely going to double in price." To try and figure that out, I asked the participants in the experiment to lie in a brain imaging scanner. It looks like this. And using a method called functional MRI, we were able to identify regions in the brain that were responding to positive information.
Ono što sam željela saznati je bilo što se događa u ljudskom mozgu što nas sprječava da ovakva upozorenja shvatimo ozbiljno. Istovremeno, kada čujemo da situacija na tržištu nekretnina ide na bolje pomislimo: "Mojoj kući će se udvostručiti cijena." Kako bismo pokušali to shvatiti, zamolila sam sudionike pokusa da legnu u skener za slikanje mozga. On izgleda ovako. Koristeći metodu koja se naziva funkcionalna magnetska rezonancija mogli smo identificirati područja u mozgu koja su reagirala na pozitivne informacije.
One of these regions is called the left inferior frontal gyrus. So if someone said, "My likelihood of suffering from cancer is 50 percent," and we said, "Hey, good news. Average likelihood is 30 percent," the left inferior frontal gyrus would respond fiercely. And it didn't matter if you're an extreme optimist, a mild optimist or slightly pessimistic, everyone's left inferior frontal gyrus was functioning perfectly well, whether you're Barack Obama or Woody Allen.
Jedno od tih područja se naziva lijeva donja frontalna vijuga. Stoga ako je osoba rekla: "Moja vjerojatnost da ću oboljeti od raka je 50 posto", na što bi mi rekli: "Čuj, dobre vijesti, prosječna vjerojatnost je 30 posto.", lijeva donja frontalna vijuga bi snažno reagirala. I nije bilo važno jeste li krajnje optimistična, blago optimistična ili lagano pesimistična osoba, svačija lijeva frontalna vijuga je funkcionirala savršeno dobro, bilo da ste Barack Obama ili Woody Allen.
On the other side of the brain, the right inferior frontal gyrus was responding to bad news. And here's the thing: it wasn't doing a very good job. The more optimistic you were, the less likely this region was to respond to unexpected negative information. And if your brain is failing at integrating bad news about the future, you will constantly leave your rose-tinted spectacles on.
Na drugoj strani mozga, desna donja frontalna vijuga je odgovarala na loše vijesti. I evo u čemu je stvar: nije baš dobro obavljala svoj zadatak. Što ste bili optmističniji, manje je bilo vjerojatno da će ovo područje reagirati na neočekivane negativne informacije. Ako vaš mozak ne uspijeva integrirati loše vijesti o budućnosti, vi ćete neprekidno gledati kroz ružičaste naočale.
So we wanted to know, could we change this? Could we alter people's optimism bias by interfering with the brain activity in these regions? And there's a way for us to do that.
Stoga smo željeli saznati možemo li ovo promijeniti. Možemo li izmjeniti ljudsku sklonost optimizmu utječući na moždanu aktivnost u ovim područjima mozga. I postoji način da to i učinimo.
This is my collaborator Ryota Kanai. And what he's doing is he's passing a small magnetic pulse through the skull of the participant in our study into their inferior frontal gyrus. And by doing that, he's interfering with the activity of this brain region for about half an hour. After that everything goes back to normal, I assure you.
Ovo je moj suradnik Ryota Kanai. On propušta mali magnetski impuls kroz sudionikovu lubanju u njegove donje frontalne vijuge. Čineći to, on utječe na aktivnost ovog područja u mozgu na otprilike pola sata. Nakon toga se, uvjeravam vas, sve vraća u normalu.
(Laughter)
(Smijeh)
So let's see what happens. First of all, I'm going to show you the average amount of bias that we see. So if I was to test all of you now, this is the amount that you would learn more from good news relative to bad news. Now we interfere with the region that we found to integrate negative information in this task, and the optimism bias grew even larger. We made people more biased in the way that they process information. Then we interfered with the brain region that we found to integrate good news in this task, and the optimism bias disappeared. We were quite amazed by these results because we were able to eliminate a deep-rooted bias in humans.
Da vidimo što se događa. Prvo ću vam pokazati prosječnu količinu pristranosti koju vidimo. Kada bih sve vas ovdje testirala, ovo je koliko više biste naučili iz dobrih vijesti u odnosu na loše vijesti. Kada utječemo na područje za koje smo utvrdili da integrira negativne informacije u ovom zadatku, sklonost optmizmu je još više porasla. Učinili smo ljude još pristranijima u načinu na koji su obrađivali informacije. Zatim smo utjecali na područje u mozgu za koje smo utvrdili da integrira dobre vijesti u ovom zadatku i sklonost optimizmu je nestala. Bili smo zapanjeni ovim rezultatima jer smo uspjeli otkloniti duboko ukorijenjenu sklonost kod ljudi.
And at this point we stopped and we asked ourselves, would we want to shatter the optimism illusion into tiny little bits? If we could do that, would we want to take people's optimism bias away? Well I've already told you about all of the benefits of the optimism bias, which probably makes you want to hold onto it for dear life. But there are, of course, pitfalls, and it would be really foolish of us to ignore them.
U tom trenutku smo se zapitali želimo li razbiti iluziju optimizma u malene komadiće? Kada bismo to mogli učiniti, želimo li ljudima oduzeti njihovu sklonost optimizmu? Već smo vam govorili o svim dobrobitima sklonosti optimizmu zbog kojih je želite zadržati po svaku cijenu. No, naravno, postoje zamke koje bi bilo blesavo ignorirati.
Take for example this email I recieved from a firefighter here in California. He says, "Fatality investigations for firefighters often include 'We didn't think the fire was going to do that,' even when all of the available information was there to make safe decisions." This captain is going to use our findings on the optimism bias to try to explain to the firefighters why they think the way they do, to make them acutely aware of this very optimistic bias in humans.
Uzmite na primjer ovu e-poštu koju sam primila od vatrogasca iz Kalifornije. On kaže: "Istrage smrtonosnih ozljeda u radu vatrogasaca često uključuju objašnjenja poput 'Nismo mislili da će vatra to učiniti', čak i kada su postojale sve raspoložive informacije za donošenje sigurnih odluka." Ovaj vatrogasni zapovjednik će iskoristiti rezultate našeg istraživanja o sklonosti optimizmu kako bi pokušao objasniti vatrogascima zašto razmišljaju na način na koji razmišljaju s ciljem osvješćivanja o sklonosti optmizmu kod ljudi.
So unrealistic optimism can lead to risky behavior, to financial collapse, to faulty planning. The British government, for example, has acknowledged that the optimism bias can make individuals more likely to underestimate the costs and durations of projects. So they have adjusted the 2012 Olympic budget for the optimism bias.
Nerealni optimizam vodi u rizično ponašanje, financijski kolaps, pogrešno planiranje. Britanska vlada je, primjerice, prepoznala da sklonost optimizmu može pojedince navesti da podcijene troškove i trajanje projekata. Stoga su budžet za Olimpijske igre 2012. godine prilagodili sklonosti optimizmu.
My friend who's getting married in a few weeks has done the same for his wedding budget. And by the way, when I asked him about his own likelihood of divorce, he said he was quite sure it was zero percent.
Moj prijatelj koji se ženi za nekoliko tjedana je isto učinio za svoj budžet za vjenčanje. Usput, kad sam ga pitala koja je vjerojatnost da će se razvesti rekao je kako je prilično siguran da je to, nula posto.
So what we would really like to do, is we would like to protect ourselves from the dangers of optimism, but at the same time remain hopeful, benefiting from the many fruits of optimism. And I believe there's a way for us to do that. The key here really is knowledge. We're not born with an innate understanding of our biases. These have to be identified by scientific investigation. But the good news is that becoming aware of the optimism bias does not shatter the illusion. It's like visual illusions, in which understanding them does not make them go away. And this is good because it means we should be able to strike a balance, to come up with plans and rules to protect ourselves from unrealistic optimism, but at the same time remain hopeful.
Ono što bismo stvarno željeli učiniti je zaštititi same sebe od opasnosti optimizma, no u isto vrijeme ostati puni nade, uživajući pogodnosti optimizma. Ja vjerujem da postoji način da to učinimo. Ključ je u znanju. Ne rađamo se s urođenim razumijevanjem naših sklonosti. One se moraju utvrditi znanstvenim istraživanjem. No dobra vijest je osvješćivanje postojanja sklonosti optimizmu ne uništava iluziju. Isto je kao i s vizualnim iluzijama u kojima njihovo razumijevanje ne uzrokuje njihovo nestajanje. To je dobro jer znači da bismo trebali moći naći ravnotežu, smisliti planove i pravila kojima ćemo se zaštititi od nerealnog optimizma, a u isto vrijeme zadržati nadu.
I think this cartoon portrays it nicely. Because if you're one of these pessimistic penguins up there who just does not believe they can fly, you certainly never will. Because to make any kind of progress, we need to be able to imagine a different reality, and then we need to believe that that reality is possible. But if you are an extreme optimistic penguin who just jumps down blindly hoping for the best, you might find yourself in a bit of a mess when you hit the ground. But if you're an optimistic penguin who believes they can fly, but then adjusts a parachute to your back just in case things don't work out exactly as you had planned, you will soar like an eagle, even if you're just a penguin.
Mislim da ovaj crtež to dobro oslikava. Ako ste jedan od ovih pesimističnih pingvina, koji jednostavno ne vjeruju da mogu poletjeti, sigurno ni nećete poletjeti. Da bismo ostvarili bilo kakav napredak moramo moći zamisliti drugačiju stvarnost, a zatim moramo vjerovati da je ta stvarnost uistinu moguća. No ako ste pretjerano optmistični pingvin koji samo skoči bez razmišljanja nadajući se najboljem, mogli bi se naći u problemu kada udarite o tlo. No ako ste optmističan pingvin koji vjeruje da može letjeti, no koji priveže padobran za leđa za slučaj da stvari ne ispadnu onako kako ste planirali, letjet ćete poput orla, čak i ako ste samo pingvin.
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Applause)
(Pljesak)