演講MP3+雙語文稿:是什么讓我們對自己的工作感覺良好?

聽力課堂TED音頻欄目主要包括TED演講的音頻MP3及中英雙語文稿，供各位英語愛好者學習使用。本文主要內(nèi)容為演講MP3+雙語文稿:是什么讓我們對自己的工作感覺良好?，希望你會喜歡！

【演講人】Dan Ariely

【演講主題】如何讓你的行為變得更好

【演講文稿-中英文】

翻譯者 Jiasi Hao 校對：Nan Yang

00:05

嗨，你可能已經(jīng)注意到了，我只有半邊胡子，這不是因為我打賭輸了。很多年前，我被嚴重燒傷。我身體大部分都被傷疤覆蓋，包括我這右半邊臉。我只是不再長胡子。事情就是這樣發(fā)生的。它看起來挺對稱的，差不多。

Hi. You might have noticed that I have half a beard. It's not because I lost a bet. Many years ago, I was badly burned. Most of my body is covered with scars, including the right side of my face. I just don't have hair. That's just how it happened. It looks symmetrical, but almost.

00:24

不管怎樣，我們已經(jīng)談論了胡子，我們開始說社會科學。尤其是，我想要大家思考的是，人類的潛能有多大，并且我們已經(jīng)到達了哪個水平。如果你想一下這個問題，在我們認為已經(jīng)達到的水平和能夠達到的水平，不論哪一方面，這里都有個很大的差距。

Anyway, now that we discussed facial hair, let's move to social science. And in particular, I want us to think about where is the potential for humanity and where we are now. And if you think about it, there's a big gap between where we think we could be and where we are, and it's in all kinds of areas.

00:44

所以，讓我問你：你們多少人上個月飲食超量了？這就很普遍，好。你們多少人上個月運動量沒有達標？好，你們多少人舉手兩次已經(jīng)是今天最大的運動量了？

So let me ask you: How many of you in the last month have eaten more than you think you should? Just kind of general. OK. How many of you in the last month have exercised less than you think you should? OK, and for how many of you has raising your hands twice been the most exercise you got today?

01:02

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

01:05

你們多少人在開車的時候發(fā)過短信？好，大家都在說實話。讓我們測一下你的誠實度。你們在座多少人在上個月上完廁所沒洗手？

How many of you have ever texted while driving? OK, we're getting honest. Let's test your honesty. How many people here in the last month have not always washed your hands when you left the bathroom?

01:18

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

01:20

沒那么誠實了。順便，這很有趣。我們對開車時發(fā)短信的承認意愿度竟然比不洗手高。這不簡單。

A little less honest. By the way, it's interesting how we're willing to admit texting and driving but not washing our hands, that's difficult.

01:27

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

01:29

我們可以一直問問題。問題是，有很多事情，當我們知道自己能夠做到——我們會變得極其不一樣，但是這個情況下，我們的應對行為截然不同。當我們思考如何能夠縮小那個差距時，通常的回答是“就告訴他們”。比如，就告訴他們開車時候發(fā)短信很危險。你知道這很危險嗎？你應該停止做這件事。你告訴他們一件事很危險，之后他們就會停止做它。

We can go on and on. The problem, the topic is that there's lots of things when we know what we could do -- we could be very, very different, but we're acting in a very different way. And when we think how do we bridge that gap, the usual answer is, "Just tell people." For example, just tell people that texting and driving is dangerous. Did you know it's dangerous? You should stop doing it. You tell people something is dangerous, and they will stop.

01:53

開車時發(fā)短信，只是一個例子。另一個非常悲哀的例子就是，在美國，我們每年大約花費七億到八億美元在我們所謂的“金融知識”上。我們做這事的結(jié)果是什么？有個最近的研究，調(diào)查了所有有關(guān)金融知識的論文——我們稱之為整合分析。研究發(fā)現(xiàn)，當你告訴人們，你教他們金融知識，他們學會了、記住了，但是他們執(zhí)行了嗎？基本沒吧。3%-4%的進步只是體現(xiàn)在剛剛課程結(jié)束后，之后便出現(xiàn)下滑。到頭來，進步率僅為0.1%——不是0，但是從人的角度看，接近于0。

Texting and driving is one example. Another very sad example is that in the US, we spend between seven and eight hundred million dollars a year on what's called "financial literacy." And what do we get as a consequence of that? There was recently a study that looked at all the research ever to be conducted on financial literacy -- what's called a meta-analysis. And what they found is that when you tell people, you teach them financial literacy, they learn and they remember. But do people execute? Not so much. The improvement is about three or four percent immediately after the course, and then it goes down. And at the end of the day, the improvement is about 0.1 percent -- not zero, but as humanly close to zero as possible.

02:37

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

02:40

所以這是一件令人悲傷的事。令人悲傷的是：給予人們信息并不是改變行為的好方法。那什么是？

So that's the sad news. The sad news is, giving information to people is just not a good recipe to change behavior. What is?

02:48

社會科學已經(jīng)取得了很大的進步，而其的基本觀點是：如果我們想要改變行為，我們必須改變環(huán)境。正確的方法不是改變?nèi)藗?，而是改變環(huán)境。我想提出一個非常簡單的思維模式來想這件事：把行為改變當作送火箭上太空，來思考這個問題。當我們想到送火箭上太空，我們一般主要要做兩件事。第一件事，就是減少摩擦。我們想要乘坐火箭，并且盡可能減少摩擦，盡量最大化滿足空氣動力學。第二件事，就是我們想要裝載盡量多的燃料，給火箭足夠多的動力和能量，來完成它的任務。而行為改變也是一樣。

Well, social science has made lots of strides, and the basic insight is that if we want to change behavior, we have to change the environment. The right way is not to change people, it's to change the environment. And I want to present a very simpleminded model of how to think about it: it's to think about behavioral change in the same way that we think about sending a rocket to space. When we think about sending a rocket to space, we want to do two main things. The first one is to reduce friction. We want to take the rocket and have as little friction as possible so it's the most aerodynamic possible. And the second thing is we want to load as much fuel as possible, to give it the most amount of motivation, energy to do its task. And behavior change is the same thing.

03:32

我們首先來說說摩擦。在這個特定的案例分析中，我會給你講一個藥店的故事，一個網(wǎng)上藥店。想象一下你去找你的醫(yī)生，你有一個慢性疾病，醫(yī)生給了開了藥，你注冊了這個網(wǎng)上藥店之后，每隔90天，你會收到這些藥的郵寄包裹。每90天，藥，藥，藥。之后這個網(wǎng)上藥店，想要讓人們從品牌藥換成仿制藥。所以他們給人們寄了信，說：“拜托，拜托，拜托，換成仿制藥。由此你可以省錢，我們可以省錢，你的雇主也能省錢?！比藗兪裁捶磻?？沒有任何反應。

So let's first talk about friction. In this particular case study I'll tell you about, there's a pharmacy, an online pharmacy. Imagine you go to your doctor. You have a long-term illness, your doctor prescribes to you a medication, you sign up for this online pharmacy and you get your medication in the mail every 90 days. Every 90 days, medication, medication, medication. And this online pharmacy wants to switch people from branded medication to generic medication. So they send people letters, and they say, "Please, please, please, switch to generics. You will save money, we will save money, your employer will save money." And what do people do? Nothing.

04:14

之后他們嘗試了各種方法，依舊沒有任何改變發(fā)生。后來，他們給人們一個一年期的很棒的優(yōu)惠。他們給人們寄了一封信，說：“如果你們現(xiàn)在改成仿制藥，可以免去一整年的藥費?！币徽昝赓M。多棒?。∧阌X得有多少人改了處方？不到10%。這時候，他們跑來我的辦公室。他們開始抱怨。他們?yōu)槭裁催x擇我？因為我寫了幾篇關(guān)于“免費的誘惑”的研究論文。在那些文章中，我們表明，如果你給某個東西降價，假如我們說10分到1分錢，不會有太多變化。如果你從1分降價到不要錢，人們就會開始激動起來。

So they try all kinds of things and nothing happens. So for one year, they give people an amazing offer. They send people a letter, and they say, "If you switch to generics now, it will be free for a whole year." Free for a whole year. Amazing! What percentage of people do you think switched? Less than 10 percent. At this point, they show up to my office. And they come to complain. Why did they pick me? I wrote a couple of papers on the "allure of free." In those papers, we showed that if you reduce the price of something for, let's say, 10 cents to one cent, nothing much happens. You reduce it from one cent to zero, now people get excited.

04:51

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

04:52

之后他們說：“看，我們讀了那些關(guān)于‘免費’的文章，所以我們‘免費’給藥。這并不如我們預期，究竟怎么回事？”我說：“你知道，這可能是一個摩擦的問題?！彼麄冋f：“什么意思？”我說：“人們最初開的是品牌藥。他們可以什么都不做，一直開著品牌藥。如果要改成仿制藥，他們必須選擇仿制藥，而且他們必須有行動，他們需要給你們回信。”所以這就是我們說的“混雜設(shè)計”。兩件事同時發(fā)生。即，品牌藥 vs仿制藥。但實際卻是，無行動vs有行動。所以我說：“我們?yōu)槭裁床徽{(diào)換過來？為何不給人們寄封信，告訴他們：我們將要把你的處方改成仿制藥。你不需要做任何事情。如果你想要保留品牌藥的選擇，請給我們回信?！?/p>

And they said, "Look, we read these papers on 'free,' we gave 'free.' Not working as we expected. What's going on?" I said, "You know, maybe it's a question of friction." They said, "What do you mean?" I said, "People are starting with branded. They can do nothing and end with branded. To move to generic, they have to choose generic over branded, but they also have to do something. They have to return the letter." So this is what we call a "confounded design." Two things are happening at the same time. It's branded versus generic, but it's doing nothing versus doing something. So I said, "Why don't we switch it? Why don't we send people a letter and say, 'We're switching you to generics. You don't need to do anything. If you want to stay with branded, please return the letter.'"

05:34

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

05:36

對吧？現(xiàn)在你認為什么情況會發(fā)生？律師，律師找上門了。

Right? What do you think happened? Lawyers, lawyers happened.

05:42

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

05:48

結(jié)果證明，這種做法并不合法。

It turns out, this is illegal.

05:50

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

05:55

順便說一下，為頭腦風暴和創(chuàng)新，做不合法不道德的事情，沒有關(guān)系，只要這些事情僅停留于頭腦風暴的層面。

By the way, for brainstorming and creativity, doing things that are illegal and immoral, it's fine, as long as it's just in the brainstorming phase.

06:04

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

06:06

但這是那想法最純粹的地方。因為這個原始設(shè)計是，品牌藥有不作為的好處。在我違法、不道德的設(shè)計中，仿制藥有了不作為的好處。但是他們同意給人們雙向選擇：給他們寄一封信，并說：“如果你不寄回這封信，我們將會被迫停止您的藥物訂閱。但當你寄回這封信，你可以選擇付這么多錢買品牌藥，那么多錢仿制藥?！爆F(xiàn)在人們必須做出行動，他們甚至加快了行動。對吧？這情況下，不作為好處沒了。那么，有多少人換了？大多數(shù)人都換了。所以這告訴我們什么？人們喜歡仿制藥，或者喜歡品牌藥？我們討厭回信。

But this was the purity of the idea, because the initial design was the branded had the no-action benefit. In my illegal, immoral design, generic had the no-action benefit. But they agreed to give people a T-intersection: send people a letter and say, "If you don't return this letter, we will be forced to stop your medications. But when you return the letter, you could choose branded at this price, generic at this price." Now people had to take an action. They were on even footing. Right? It wasn't that one had the no-action benefit. What percentage do you think switched? The vast majority switched. So what does it tell us? Do people like generics, or do we like branded? We hate returning letters.

06:48

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

06:50

這是關(guān)于摩擦的故事：小事，但重要。摩擦的意思是，思考著預期行為，之后想：哪里存在太多摩擦，減慢了人們采取行動的速度?之后每次你都會看到那個預期行為和容易的行為不一致，這說明我們想要嘗試，并重新調(diào)整那些行為。

This is the story of friction: small things really matter. And friction is about taking the desired behavior and saying: Where do we have too much friction so it's slowing people down from acting on it? And every time you see that the desired behavior and the easy behavior are not aligned, it means we want to try and realign them.

07:10

這是第一部分，我們講了摩擦?，F(xiàn)在來談談動力。在這個特別的研究中，我們嘗試著讓肯尼亞的基貝拉貧民窟里非常貧窮的人們存一點點錢，以備不時之需。你知道，如果你非常非常貧窮，你不會有一點多余的錢，你只能勉強度日，有時，壞事還會發(fā)生。當壞事發(fā)生的時候， 你沒有任何依靠，所以你借錢?；惱娜藗冇袝r會借那種高達10%周利率的錢。之后，當然，就很難脫離這種窘境。你勉強度日，壞事發(fā)生，你借錢，情況變得更糟，之后更糟，更糟。所以我們想要讓人們存下一點點錢備用。我們考慮了，他們做這事的動力是什么，我們還需要加入一些什么動力因素？我們嘗試了各種東西。有些人，我們每周發(fā)消息給他們并說：“請嘗試著存下100先令”——大約1美金——“這周。”有些人，我們給他們發(fā)，仿佛是他們的孩子發(fā)來的消息。所以短信寫著，“爸爸媽媽，我是小喬伊，”——不管孩子的名字是什么—— “這周請嘗試著存下100先令，為了我們家的未來。”對吧？我是猶太人，愧疚感總是有幫助。

That's the first part. We talked about friction. Now let's talk about motivation. In this particular study, we were trying to get very poor people in a slum called Kibera in Kenya to save a little bit of money for a rainy day. You know, if you're very, very poor, you have no extra money, you live hand to mouth, and from time to time, bad things happen. And when something bad happens, you have nothing to draw on, you borrow. The Kibera people can borrow at sometimes up to 10 percent interest a week. And then, of course, it's really hard to get out of it. You live hand to mouth, something bad happens, you borrow, things get worse and worse and worse. So we wanted people to keep a little bit of money for a rainy day. And we thought about what is the motivation, what is the fuel that we need to add? And we tried all kinds of things. Some people, we texted them once a week and said, "Please try to save 100 shillings" -- about a dollar -- "this week." Some people, we sent a text message as if it came from their kids. So it said, "Hi Mom, hi Dad, this is little Joey" -- whatever the name of the kid was -- "Try and save 100 shillings this week for the future of our family." Right? I'm Jewish, a little bit of guilt always works.

08:24

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

08:25

有的人拿了10%的利率?！罢埓嫦?00先令，我們將會給你們10%利息?！庇械娜四昧?0%。有些人同時拿了10%和20%，但他們是通過損失厭惡而獲得的。什么是損失厭惡？損失厭惡就是，我們討厭輸錢的程度遠大于我們享受贏錢的程度?，F(xiàn)在，想一下在10%條件下的某個人存了40先令，他們存了40先令，我們給他們額外的4先令。他們說“非常感謝?！逼鋵嵞莻€人損失了6先令。如果他們能存100，本可以拿額外的6先令，但是他們看不到。所以我們搞了個實驗前匹配。我們在一周開始的時候，把10先令放在他們跟前，說：“它在等著你！”之后如果有人存進40，我們會說：“喔，你存了40，可以給你4先令，另外的6先令我們拿走了?！彼赃@兩個情況，實驗前、或后的匹配，人們都拿到了10%。但是在實驗前匹配中，他們看到了不匹配的錢消失在他們的賬戶上。我們嘗試了短信、來自孩子的短信、10%和20%現(xiàn)金獎勵，實驗前和實驗后匹配。我們還另加了一個條件。那是一枚硬幣，大概這樣的大小，上面寫有24個數(shù)字。我們叫他們把這枚硬幣放在屋子里的某個地方，之后每個星期，拿把刀在硬幣上劃掉一個數(shù)字——第1周，第2、3、4周——像減法符號一樣橫著劃線，如果他們沒有存錢， 之后他們?nèi)绻驽X了，就上下劃線。

Some people got 10 percent. "Save up to a hundred shillings, we'll give you 10 percent." Some people got 20 percent. Some people got also 10 percent and 20 percent, but they got it with loss aversion. What is loss aversion? Loss aversion is the idea that we hate losing more than we enjoy gaining. Now, think about somebody who is in a 10-percent condition and they put 40 shillings in. They put 40 shillings, we give them four more, they say thank you very much. That person gave up six. They could have gotten six more if they gave a hundred, but they don't see it. So we created what we call pre-match. We put the 10 shillings in at the beginning of the week. We said, "It's waiting for you!" And then if somebody puts 40 in, we say, "Oh, you put 40 in, we're leaving four, and we're taking six back." So in both cases, pre-match or post-match, people get 10 percent. But in the pre-match, they see the money they did not match leaving their account. So we have text, text from kids, 10 percent, 20 percent, pre-match, post-match. And we had one more condition. It was a coin about this size, with 24 numbers written on it. And we asked them to put the coin somewhere in their hut, and every week, take a knife and scratch the number for that week -- week one, two, three, four -- scratch it like a minus if they didn't save and scratch it up and down if they saved.

09:46

現(xiàn)在，你想想：哪一個方法最有效？短信、來自孩子的短信、每周10%和20%現(xiàn)金獎勵，以及硬幣？我可以告訴你們普遍人們的想法。我們做了這樣一個預測研究，在美國和肯尼亞。人們認為20%的方法能鼓勵大家存錢，10%鼓勵力度少一些，其余的沒有用——孩子，硬幣，不重要。人們認為損失厭惡的影響很小。

Now, think to yourself: Which one of those methods do you think worked the best? Text, text from the kids, 10 percent, 20 percent, beginning of the week, end of the week, and the coin? I'll tell you what the average people think. We've done these studies of prediction, both in the US and in Kenya. People think that 20 percent will get a lot of action, 10 percent less, the rest of it will do nothing -- kids, coin, doesn't matter. People think loss aversion will have a small effect.

10:14

但實際上？每周一次的短信幫助程度很大。好消息！這個項目持續(xù)了6個月。人們會忘記，提醒他們很好。一周結(jié)束時的10%幫助更大。金錢激勵是有用的。一周結(jié)束時的20%——就和10%一樣，沒有差別。一周開始時的10%，幫助更大。損失厭惡有用。一周開始時的20%，就和一周開始時的10%一樣，沒有什么差別。之后來自孩子的短信就和20%外加損失厭惡一樣有效——這很令人驚訝，對吧？孩子的短信如此激勵人們，是一件多棒的事。所以還有一個結(jié)論就是：我們還沒有充分利用孩子。

What actually happened? Sending a text reminder once a week helps a lot. Good news! This program lasted six months. People forget. Reminding people is great. Ten percent at the end of the week helped some more. Financial incentives work. Twenty percent at the end of the week -- just like 10 percent, no difference. Ten percent in the beginning of the week helps some more. Loss aversion works. Twenty percent in the beginning of the week, just like 10 percent in the beginning of the week, no difference. And the text message from the kids was just as effective as 20 percent plus loss aversion -- which is amazing, right? It's amazing how motivating messages from kids were. And one conclusion is we don't use kids enough.

11:00

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

11:02

當然，我不是指使用童工。但是如果你想想家長和孩子，我們能為孩子們做到最好。我們再想想未來，我覺得我們應該思考如何利用人們的動力源泉，讓家長們表現(xiàn)得更好。

And, of course, I don't mean in a child labor sense. But if you think about parents and their kids, we are the best that we can for our kids, and we think about the future, and I think we should think about how to use that amazing source of motivation to get parents to behave in a better way.

11:23

但這個研究中的大驚喜是這個硬幣。使用硬幣方法的，他們的存款是別的方法的2倍?，F(xiàn)在問題是：為什么？硬幣有什么奇特之處？所以讓我現(xiàn)在來和你說，我是怎么開始思考那個硬幣的，之后再回來解決這個問題。

But the big surprise of this study was the coin. The coin basically doubled savings compared to everything else. And now the question is: Why? What was it about the coin? So I'll tell you how I started thinking about the coin, and then we'll come back to it.

11:37

當我做關(guān)于買咖啡的研究時，我不需要去任何地方。我可以就坐在辦公室。我已經(jīng)買了足夠多的咖啡，也知道整個流程是什么。細節(jié)，我很熟悉。當你在一些世界上最貧窮的地方做研究時，你必須親自實地調(diào)查，看看那里的情況，獲得有關(guān)系統(tǒng)如何運轉(zhuǎn)的一些見解，之后就在那一天，我在南非一個叫索韋托的地方，坐在一個賣喪葬保險的地方。你知道，在美國，人們都是在婚禮上砸大把金錢。但在南非，是葬禮。 人們會為葬禮花掉一到兩年的收入。之后我坐在這里面——順便說一下，在你評價南非人針對葬禮的行為“不理性”之前，我只想提醒你，相比花很多錢在婚禮上，花大手筆在葬禮上，至少你可以確認一生只有一次。

So you know, when I do research on, let's say, buying coffee, I don't need to go anywhere. I can sit in my office. I've bought enough coffee. I know how it works. The details, I'm familiar with. When you do research in some of the poorest places in the world, you have to go and visit and see what's going on and get some insight about how the system works. And on that particular day, I'm in a place called Soweto in South Africa, and I'm sitting in a place that sells funeral insurance. You know, in the US people spend crazy amounts of money on weddings? In South Africa, it's funerals. People spend up to a year or two years of income on funerals. And I sit in this place -- by the way, before you judge the South Africans as being irrational with this, I just want to remind you that spending a lot of money on funerals compared to weddings, at least you know for sure you only have one.

12:31

（笑聲）

(Laughter)

12:40

好吧，所以我坐在賣喪葬保險的地方。之后一個男子和他的兒子進來——他的兒子大約12歲——他買了一個禮拜的喪葬保險。如果他在未來7 天內(nèi)死亡，能報銷90%他的喪葬費用。對吧？這些是非常貧窮的人們，他們買非常小額的保險以及少量肥皂，諸如此類。當他拿到那個保險證書，他非常隆重地將證書遞給了他兒子。當他遞出的時候，我在想，為什么這么隆重？這父親在做什么？現(xiàn)在，想想這個養(yǎng)家糊口的人 在特定的那天，決定把錢放進保險或存款。這家人今晚將會經(jīng)歷什么？他們將會看到更少的東西。對吧？那樣程度的貧困，更少的食物、煤油，和水——有些東西今晚會變少。之后他的父親所為，以及我們研究中硬幣嘗試做的，是為了說，沒錯，餐桌上更少的食物，但是，還有另一個活動。發(fā)生的事情是，這里有不少很好且重要的經(jīng)濟活動，例如存款、保險，它們都是不可見的。那現(xiàn)在的問題就是：我們?nèi)绾巫屗鼈冏兊每梢姡?/p>

OK, so I sit in this place that sells funeral insurance. And this guy comes in with his son -- his son is about 12 -- and he buys funeral insurance for a week. It will cover 90 percent of his funeral expense only if he dies in the next seven days. Right? These are very poor people, they buy small amounts of insurance and small amount of soap and such. And he gets that certificate, and in a very ceremonious way, he gives it to his son. And as he gives it to his son, I think to myself, why the ceremony? What is this father doing? Now, think about the breadwinner that decides on that particular day to direct some money into insurance or savings. What is the family going to see tonight? They're going to see less. Right? At that level of poverty, there'll be less food, less kerosene, less water -- something less tonight. And what his father was doing and what our coin was trying to do is to say, yes, there's less food on the table, but there's another activity. You see, what happened is, there are many good, important economic activities, like savings and insurance, that are invisible. And now the question is: How do we make them visible?

13:50

所以讓我們回到開始的火箭模型。我們必須，首先，看看系統(tǒng)并且看看其中哪些地方，利用摩擦，是我們可以改進的，我們在哪里能夠消除摩擦？在這之后，我們想做的下一件事，就是廣泛地思考這個系統(tǒng)，并說：我們可以加入什么其它的動力因素？這是一個困難很多的操作， 并且我們不總是知道什么最管用。會是錢嗎？會是損失厭惡嗎？會是某個可見的東西嗎？我們不知道，所以我們要不斷嘗試不同的東西。我們也需要意識到，我們的直覺有時會誤導我們。我們并不總是知道，怎么做效果最好。

So let's go back to our rocket model. We have to, first of all, look at the system and see where there's little things we can fix, with friction, where is there that we can remove friction? And then the next thing we want to do is to think broadly about the system, and say: What other motivations can we bring in? And that's a much more difficult exercise, and we don't always know what would work best. Is it going to be money? Is it going to be loss aversion? Is it going to be something that is visible? We don't know, and we have to try different things. We also have to realize that our intuition sometimes misleads us. We don't always necessarily know what would work the best.

14:29

所以，如果我們回想開篇說的我們在哪個水平和我們將能達到哪個水平的差距，看著這個差距，并且思考這件事，真的非常令人難過。但好消息是，還有很多我們能做的事。有的改變是簡單的，有的改變會更加復雜。但如果我們能直接擊破每個問題，不僅是通過給人們提供更多信息，而且嘗試著改變摩擦，加強動力，我想我們可以……我們能彌補差距嗎？不能。但我們能做得更好嗎？絕對可以。

So if we think about this gap between where we could be and where we are, it's a really sad thing to see this gap and to think about it. But the good news is, there's lots we can do. Some of the changes are easy, some of the changes are more complex. But if we'll attack each problem directly, not by just providing more information to people but trying to change the friction, add motivation, I think we can ... Can we close the gap? No. But can we get much better? Absolutely, yes.

14:58

非常感謝。

Thank you very much.

15:00

（掌聲）

(Applause)