权力导致腐败

标签: 权力 腐败 | 发表时间:2011-10-01 08:48 | 作者:炸毛猫 zoey
出处:http://www.yeeyan.org

译者 炸毛猫

All power tends to corrupt

权力导致腐败

But power without status corrupts absolutely

但是没有地位的权力导致绝对腐败

DURING the second world war a new term of abuse entered the English language. To call someone “a little Hitler” meant he was a menial functionary who employed what power he had in order to annoy and frustrate others for his own gratification. From nightclub bouncers to the squaddies at Abu Ghraib prison who tormented their prisoners for fun, little Hitlers plague the world. The phenomenon has not, though, hitherto been subject to scientific investigation.

二战时期,英语里出现了一个形容滥用权力的新名词。“小希特勒”是指那些为了自己的满足感,运用手中的权力折磨他人的小官员们。从夜总会保镖到阿布格莱布监狱以虐囚为乐的新兵,小希特勒们无处不在,给整个世界带来痛苦。然而,至今仍没有科学调查涉及这个现象。

Nathanael Fast of the University of Southern California has changed that. He observed that lots of psychological experiments have been done on the effects of status and lots on the effects of power. But few, if any, have been done on both combined. He and his colleagues Nir Halevy of Stanford University and Adam Galinsky of Northwestern University, in Chicago, set out to correct this. In particular they wanted to see if it is circumstances that create little Hitlers or, rather, whether people of that type simply gravitate into jobs which allow them to behave badly. Their results have just been published in the Journal of Experimental Social Psychology.

南加州大学的Nathanael Fast教授改变了这一点。他观察到,许多心理学实验研究地位对人的影响,也有很多研究权力对人的影响。但是几乎没有实验将这二者结合。在芝加哥,他和斯坦福大学的同事Nir Halevy和西北大学的Adam Galinsky准备证实这一点。他们尤其想弄清楚,是环境造就了小希特勒们,还是这一类人只是被某些可以滥用权力的职位吸引了。他们的研究结果在《实验社会心理学》上发表。

Dr Fast’s experiment randomly assigned each of 213 participants to one of four situations that manipulated their status and power. All participants were informed that they were taking part in a study on virtual organisations and would be interacting with, but not meeting, a fellow student who worked in the same fictional consulting firm. Participants were then assigned either the role of “idea producer”, a job that entailed generating and working with important ideas, or of “worker”, a job that involved menial tasks like checking for typos. A post-experiment questionnaire demonstrated that participants did, as might be expected, look upon the role of idea producer with respect and admiration. Equally unsurprisingly, they looked down on the role of worker.

Fast博士的实验将213个参与者随机分配到权力和地位的四种组合中去。所有的参与者都被告知他们在参与一个有关虚拟组织的研究,并且会与一个在同一家虚拟咨询公司工作的学生进行交流,但不会与他见面。之后,一些参与者担任“思想者”的角色,负责构思和实施一些重要的想法;另一些人被分派到“工人”的角色,主要从事一些如检查打字错误的低等工作。实验之后的问卷调查不出所料,参与者们对思想者表示尊敬和钦佩,对工人们则很轻视。

To manipulate their power, participants were told there would be a draw for a $50 bonus prize at the end of the study and that, regardless of their role, each participant would be able to dictate which activities his partner must engage in to qualify to enter the draw. Participants that Dr Fast wanted to imbue with a sense of power were informed that one other element of their role involved dictating which “hoops” their partners would have to jump through in order to qualify for the draw, and that they controlled the amount of effort the partner had to exert in order to win the $50. They were also told that the partner did not have any such control over them. In contrast, low-power participants were informed that while they had the ability to determine the hoops their partner had to jump through, that partner ultimately had more control because he could remove the low-power participant’s name from the raffle if he did not like the hoops selected.

为了改变权力这个变量,实验者告诉参与者,在实验的最后,将有一个奖励为50美元的抽签。不论角色如何,每一个参与者都有权力能命令他的搭档完成某项考验以获得抽签资格。Fast博士给部分参与者灌输很强的权力意识,他告诉他们,他们的角色可以支配自己的搭档通过考验来获得抽签资格,并且可以决定自己的搭档为赢得50美元所付出的努力,然而他们的搭档不能支配他们。相反,权力比较低的参与者被告知,尽管他们有权决定他们的搭档必须经受的考验,但如果他们的搭档不喜欢他们的选择,就可以把他们从抽奖名单中除名,因此,他们的搭档实际拥有更的的权力。

Participants were then presented with a list of ten hoops and told to select as many as they liked (but a minimum of one) for their partner to jump through. Unknown to the participants, Dr Halevy and Dr Galinsky had conducted an independent test, using 58 people not involved in the main study, to rate how demeaning, humiliating, degrading, embarrassing and uncomfortable each of the ten possible activities actually was. Five of the ten were rated as deeply demeaning. These included things like: “say ‘I am filthy’ five times” and “bark like a dog three times”. The other five were not considered particularly demeaning. They included: “tell the experimenter a funny joke” and “clap your hands 50 times”.

之后,实验者给参与者们展示了这十项考验的内容,并告诉他们,他们想选几项都可以(但至少一个)。参与者们不知道,Halevy博士和Galinsky博士已经进行了另一个独立的测试。他们使用了另外58名没有参与主要研究的实验对象,来评定这十项活动有多么有损人格,令人感到羞辱,失去尊严,尴尬和不快。其中有五项活动被评为极度有损人格,包括“说五遍‘我很脏’”和“学狗叫三次”。另外五项并没有被认为特别贬低人格,比如“给实验者讲个笑话”和“拍手五十下”。

Participants who had both status and power did not greatly demean their partners. They chose an average of 0.67 demeaning activities for those partners to perform. Low-power/low-status and low-power/high-status participants behaved similarly. They chose, on average, 0.67 and 0.85 demeaning activities. However, participants who were low in status but high in power—the classic “little Hitler” combination—chose an average of 1.12 deeply demeaning tasks for their partners to engage in. That was a highly statistically significant distinction.

那些既有地位又有权力的参与者并不会很大程度地贬低自己的搭档。他们选择让搭档通过的考验的平均打分为0.67。没有权力或没有地位的参与者与没有权力有地位的参与者选择相似,平均打分为0.67和0.85。但是,没有地位却享有很高权力的参与者选择了高达1.12的考验来贬低自己搭档的身份,他们就是典型的“小希特勒”。实验结果表明了统计学上显著的区别。

Of course, not everybody in the high-power/low-status quadrant of the experiment behaved badly. Underlying personality may still have a role. But as with previous experiments in which random members of the public have been asked to play prison guard or interrogator, Dr Fast’s result suggests that many quite ordinary people will succumb to bad behaviour if the circumstances are right.

当然,不是所有出于高权力和低地位组合的人都如此恶劣。根本的人格仍然起作用。但正如那些让随机选出的公众扮演监狱看守和审讯官的实验一样,Fast博士的实验说明,当条件满足时,许多普通人会屈从于不良行径。

相关 [权力 腐败] 推荐:

权力导致腐败

- zoey - 译言-每日精品译文推荐
但是没有地位的权力导致绝对腐败. To call someone “a little Hitler” meant he was a menial functionary who employed what power he had in order to annoy and frustrate others for his own gratification.

权利导致腐败,而没有地位的权利导致绝对腐败

- ZaeX - 译言-每日精品译文推荐
第二次世界大战期间,滥用职权在英语中又有了一个新的表达方式. 把某人称作“小希特勒”意味着他是一个会为了一己私欲而动用自己所有的权力骚扰或折磨他人的卑鄙的公职人员. 从夜店保镖到阿布格莱布监狱中以折磨囚犯为乐的新兵,小希特勒们散布在全球各地. 但是到目前为止,还未对这种现象进行科学调查. 南加利佛尼亚大学的纳撒内尔·法斯特改变了这一状况.

一款天才创意:腐败终结者应用Bribespot

- rockmaple - 36氪
真的是天才,竟然有创业公司能够开发出这样一款腐败终结者应用Bribespot. 该应用的理念很简单,通过地图和位置每个人都可以匿名举报腐败行为(包括索贿,行贿,数额,地点,涉及机构,背后的故事等),由于可以统一在地图上显示,用户可以一目了然的看出哪些地方的腐败行为高发. 据悉,开发者推出这样一款应用主要是受到一次事件的震动,一对夫妇由于没有向医院给够红包导致妇科医生迟迟不出现,最后使得婴儿出生时就面临窒息致死的危险,生下来之后又永远的失聪和失明了.

中国将间谍案件当作腐败案件报道

- 微笑!?~ - Solidot
胆小的读者 写道 "BBC报道,从YouTube上的视频短片(110分钟)中看到,金一南少将对听课的学员们发表讲话时说,一些因腐败罪名而受到审判的官员实际上是犯了间谍罪. 这些案件说出去令中国当局难堪,所以按照腐败罪名进行查处.

从名医院腐败案看权网编织术

- roc - 牛博国际
百年名医院湘雅医院近期陷入丑闻之中. 据《中国新闻周刊》《新世纪》等媒体连续报道(新闻链接),该医院腐败窝案牵出了15年的药品采购黑幕,然而目前被有关司法部门控制的只是一些“小人物”,如采购员以及供货商. 按常理就可知道,长达15年金额涉及数亿的腐败窝案,不可能是几个低级别的采购员、药剂部门负责人勾搭几个药商就能操作的,大头一定隐藏在水平面下面.

中国/社会/贪腐: 茅台酒被讽为腐败象征

- - chinese.rfi.fr : 最近24小时新闻
据报道,在胡润研究院发布的“全球十大最值钱奢侈品牌榜”中,茅台排列在世界著名奢侈品牌路易威登、爱马仕和宝马之后,名列第四. 此外,茅台还被评为“十大最受富豪青睐的送礼品牌”之一. 此后不久,正在召开的上海市第十三届人民代表大会第五次会议上,上海市多名人大代表建议公款消费不准喝茅台酒. 这种白酒独产于中国贵州省怀仁市的茅台镇,是世界三大著名蒸馏酒之一.

互联网公司是如何腐败的?

- -
燃财经(ID:rancaijing)原创. 作者 | 黎明 孔明明 闫丽娇. 最近,互联网行业又掀起了一场“反腐风暴”. 小米、美团、360、蚂蚁金服,这些大型互联网公司纷纷挥舞大刀,砍向了内部涉嫌舞弊受贿的员工. 有人被直接从公司带走,有人被公安机关拘捕,有人因受贿罪被判有期徒刑. 一场针对互联网公司内部的抓捕行动正在上演.

梅德韦杰夫:青年争当公务员说明腐败很严重

- lzhi - Lzhi's Views
“当青年坚定不移地选择公务员这条道路时,有一系列问题:这是个有名望的职业吗. 这意味着,他们选择这条道路是因为这是快速致富的方法. 也就是说,青年 在这方面看到了可以不费力气快速取得成功的榜样. ” --梅德韦杰夫 相关阅读. 《变形金刚3》:卖可卖,非常卖. 中国高铁电网控制系统疑被美国特工放置“蠕虫”.

腐败有利于专制: 北周开国者与名士的不朽答问

- kawufei - 徐贲的BLOG
腐败有利于专制: 北周开国者与名士的不朽答问.      宇文泰者北周开国奠基人也. 当他作北魏的丞相模仿曹操“挟天子令诸侯”之时,遇到了与诸葛亮齐名的名士苏绰. 宇文泰向苏绰讨教治国之道,二人密谈了三日三夜,留下了如下极具现实意义和可操作性的不朽答问. 为便于广大读者阅览,谨将历史典籍中原来的文言文翻译成如下白话文——.