我们倾向于认为当我们输掉时硬币翻转是不公平的

尽管几乎是“随机”的标志性示例 - 好吧，那是骰子和骰子 - 我们忍不住觉得涉及一些技能。特别是当我们输掉时。

As it turns out, we tend towards the same cognitive errors with coin flips. Despite being pretty much the iconic example of “random” – well, that and dice rolls – we can’t help but feel like there’s some element of skill involved. Especially when we lose.

事实证明，我们倾向于用硬币翻转遇到相同的认知错误。尽管几乎是“随机”的标志性示例 - 好吧，那是骰子和骰子 - 我们忍不住觉得涉及一些技能。特别是当我们输掉时。

“In 11 studies, participants competed against another participant for a positive or negative outcome, determined by a physical or virtual coin flip,” explain Rémy Furrer and Daniel Gilbert, both psychologists at Harvard University, and Timothy Wilson, from the University of Virginia, in the introduction to a new paper this month. “The independent variable was who called heads or tails and flipped the coin: the participant or their opponent.”

“在11项研究中，参与者与另一个参与者竞争，取得了积极或负面的结果，这是由身体或虚拟硬币翻转决定的，”哈佛大学的心理学家RémyFurrer和Daniel Gilbert解释说，本月新论文的简介。 “自变量是谁打电话给头或尾巴，然后翻转硬币：参与者或他们的对手。”

“When participants lost the flip, we found an illusion of unfairness: They reported that the process was less fair, were less pleased with their outcome, and found the other person less likable when their opponent flipped the coin.”

“当参与者失去翻转时，我们发现了不公平的幻想：他们报告说，这一过程不公平，对他们的结果不满意，并且发现当对手翻转硬币时，另一个人不那么讨人喜欢。”

Now, evidently this is nonsense – okay, coin flips aren’t technically 50/50, but they’re near as damn it, and certainly not so predictable that the nearly 6,000 study participants involved in the 11 studies would be able to influence their outcomes at any scale. But it’s a hard notion to shake: “the illusion of unfairness appears to be a quick, intuitive process that is not easily corrected,” the trio point out.

现在，显然这是胡说八道 - 好的，硬币翻转从技术上讲不是50/50，但是它们接近它，当然不是那么可预测，以至于参与11项研究的近6,000名研究参与者将能够在任何规模上影响其结果。但这很难动摇：“不公平的幻觉似乎是一个不容易纠正的快速，直观的过程，”三人组指出。

And here’s the thing: rather than being just a fun little quirk of the human brain, this misconception may have some pretty important real-world impacts. See, we create this illusion of unfairness because we wish the world were sensible – that we have control over our lives, and that ultimately, justice will prevail. It isn’t comfortable for us to accept that a lot of things are, basically, pretty random – so we pretend it isn’t, and just get mad when things go wrong.

这就是事实：这种误解不仅仅是人类大脑的一个有趣的小怪癖，还可能产生一些非常重要的现实影响。瞧，我们创造了这种不公平的幻想，因为我们希望世界明智 - 我们可以控制自己的生活，最终，正义将占上风。我们接受很多事情是基本上是随机的，因此我们不舒服 - 我们假装不是，而当事情出错时就会生气。

“Our results […] speak to the philosophical literature on ‘moral luck,’ which refers to the case in which people are held morally accountable for acts that are not entirely under their control,” the authors explain in the supplemental materials to their paper. “An example is the case of two drunk drivers, one of whom strikes a pedestrian (who ran into the middle of the road) while the other makes it home without incident. Most people would judge the first driver more harshly, even though the presence or absence of pedestrians was not controllable by either driver.”

作者在补充材料中解释说：“我们的结果[…]谈到了关于'道德运气'的哲学文献，这是指人们在道德上对不完全控制的行为负责的情况。” “一个例子就是两个醉酒的司机，其中一名袭击了行人（跑到路中间），而另一名驾驶员则无事发生。

“In our studies, participants exhibited a strong version of lay moral luck. They believed that the person who flipped the coin was more responsible for a negative outcome, even though the outcome was random and uncontrollable.”

“在我们的研究中，参与者表现出强烈的道德运气。他们认为，将硬币翻转的人对结果负有负面影响，即使结果是随机的且无法控制的。”