Time is not money
Thinking about it makes you a better person, not aworse one
“THE love of money”, St Paul memorably wrote to his protege Timothy, “is the root of all evil.” “All” may be putting it a bit strongly, but dozens of psychological studies have indeed shownthat people primed to think about money before an experiment are more likely to lie, cheat andsteal during the course of that experiment.
Another well-known aphorism, ascribed to Benjamin Franklin, is “time is money”. If true, thatsuggests a syllogism: that the love of time is a root of evil, too. But a paper just published inPsychological Science by Francesca Gino of Harvard and Cassie Mogilner of the University ofPennsylvania suggests precisely the opposite.
另一名言—“时间就是金钱”，出自本杰.富兰克林。如果他说的有理，那么就可以推断出：对时间的珍爱也是万恶之源。然而，哈佛商学院的弗兰切斯卡· 吉诺(Francesca Gino)和宾夕法尼亚大学的凯希·莫吉内尔(CassieMogilner)教授共同撰写发表在《心理科学》的论文则持有完全相反的结论。
Dr Gino and Dr Mogilner asked a group of volunteers to do a series of what appeared to beaptitude tests. As is often the case in such experiments, though, what the volunteers weretold, and what the truth was, were rather different things.
In the first test they were asked to make, within three minutes, as many coherent sentencesas they could out of a set of words they had been presented with. What they were not told wasthat each of them had been assigned to one of three groups. Some volunteers’ word sets wereseeded with ones associated with money, such as “dollars”, “financing” and “spend”. Somewere seeded with words associated with time (eg, “clock”, “hours”, “moment”). And some wereseeded with neither. Thus unknowingly primed, the volunteers were ready for the second test.
This was mathematical. They were given a sheet of paper with 20 matrices which eachcontained 12 numbers, two of which added up to ten (for example, 3.81 and 6.19). They hadto write down, on a separate answer sheet, how many of these pairs they could manage tofind in five minutes. They were also given a packet of money and told they could rewardthemselves with a dollar for each pair they discovered.
Crucially, they were not asked to show their workings on the answer sheets—and the matrixsheets, on which those workings might have appeared, carried no identifier and wereostentatiously discarded once the test was done. Nevertheless, by hiding an identificationcode in a sample matrix on the answer sheet, Dr Gino and Dr Mogilner knew which matrixsheet each candidate had been given and thus who had cheated and who had not. They foundthat 88% of those who had been primed with money-related words in the first test cheated, asdid 67% of those given neutral words. Of those primed with time-related words, though, only42% cheated.
Nor, despite St Paul’s aphorism, was the lure of lucre during the experiment (as opposed tothe effect of thinking about it as a result of being primed) necessary as a corrupting influence. Asimilar trial on different participants showed that presenting the matrix as a test ofintelligence also caused those primed with the idea of money to cheat more than those primedwith the idea of time—though, intriguingly, that did not apply if the matrix was presented as atest of personality.
This led Dr Gino and Dr Mogilner to suspect that self-reflection played a part in controllingunethical behaviour during the test. They therefore conducted a third test in which, for half thevolunteers, there was a mirror in the cubicle they were sitting in when doing the experiment.
Volunteers primed to think about money cheated 39% of the time when a mirror was presentbut 67% when it was not. Those primed to think about time cheated 32% of the time in thepresence of the mirror and 36% in its absence—results that are statistically indistinguishable.
Finally, a fourth experiment asked primed volunteers to fill in a questionnaire before tacklingthe matrix. In among “filler” questions intended to disguise what was happening this askedthem to rate how they felt about self-reflective statements like, “Right now, I am thinkingabout who I am as a person.”
As in the previous tests, those primed with money words cheated more often than thoseprimed with neutral words and far more often than those primed with time words. But whethersomeone cheated was also related to how strongly he felt about the self-reflective statementspresented to him in the questionnaire.
It seems, then, that thinking about time has the opposite effect on people from thinking aboutmoney. It makes them more honest than normal, rather than less so. Moreover, the morereflective they are, the more honest they become. There must be an aphorism in that.
1.likely to 可能
例句:This is likely to revive consumer spending and awhole raft of consumer industries.
2.ask to 要求
例句:Other companies whom Nokia will ask to pay royalties will have to think very hard whetherto pay or pick a fight.
3.such as 诸如
例句:And they tend to do so more dramatically in a dog-eat-dog sector such as the financialindustry, says staw.
4.manage to 设法
例句:The pilot did manage to get airborne.