期望导致结果④
罗森塔尔(Robert Rosenthal)的皮格马利翁效应(pygmalion effect)关于自我实现预言的研究
——理论假设
无意识地对那些可能会成功的学生的行为表现给予一些鼓励和鞭策,使这些学生产生自我实现的预期,变得更加出色。当然,这似乎是以牺牲那些教师对其期望不高的学生为代价的。为了检验这一理论假设,罗森塔尔和他的助手们与一所小学(称为橡树小学)取得合作,这所小学位于某个大城镇的中低阶层生活区。
在小学教师得到学生的某种信息(如IQ分数)时,他们或多或少地会对学生的潜能产生某种期望,这种期望会使他们研究方法
开学初,在橡树学校工作人员的配合下,研究者对1-6年级的所有学生进行了IQ测验(一般能力测验,简称TOGA)。选择这个测验的原因在于,它属于非文字测验,学生的分数不依赖于先前接受的阅读.写作和算术技能等方面的训练。而且,一般而言橡树学校的教师对此测验并不熟悉。研究者告诉教师,学生们接受的是“哈佛应变能力测验”。在此情况下,这种隐瞒很有必要,其目的是让教师对这些学生产生一些期望,而这正是该实验成功的必要因素。研究者还进一步对教师解释道,该测验的成绩可以对一名学生未来在学术上是否会有成就作出预测。换句话说,他们是要让教师相信在测验中获得高分的学生,其学习能力在未来的这个学年中将有所提高。实际上,这个测验并不具备这种预测能力。
![](/psych/attachments/2013/05/17_201305221543331cWa5.gif)
在橡树学校,总共有6个年级,每个年级有3个班,每班有1名班主任,共18人(16女,2男)。每位班主任都得到了一份名单,上面记录着本班在“哈佛测验”上得分最高的前20﹪的学生,以便教师们了解在本学年里哪些学生有发展潜力。但是,下面才是本研究的关键:即教师所得名单中的前十名学生是被完全随机地分配到这种实验条件之下。这些学生和其他学生(控制组)的唯一区别就是,教师以为他们(实验组学生)会有不同寻常的智力发展表现。
接近学年结束时,研究者对所有学生在进行了相同的IQ测验(即TOGA),并计算出每个学生IQ的变化程度。通过对实验组和控制组的IQ变化差异的检验就可以看出,是否存在期望效应。
研究结果
这项研究中,研究者获得了两个主要发现:一是期望效应的确存在。总和全校的情况来看,那些被教师以为智力发展会有明显进步的学生,其IQ平均提高幅度显著高于控制组的学生(分别为12.2个百分点和8.2个百分点)。二是这些作用在低年级中表现得更明显,而在高年级中几乎不存在。
Feldman, Robert S.; Prohaska, Thomas (1979). "The student as Pygmalion: Effect of student expectation on the teacher". Journal of Educational Psychology 71 (4): 485–493. doi:10.1037/0022-0663.71.4.485.
Jussim, L.; Harber, K. D. (2005). "Teacher Expectations and Self-Fulfilling Prophecies: Knowns and Unknowns, Resolved and Unresolved Controversies". Personality and Social Psychology Review 9 (2): 131–155. doi:10.1207/s15327957pspr0902_3.
---------------------------------------------
Rosenthal R & Jacobson L. Pygmalion in the classroom: teacher expectation and pupils’ intellectual development. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston, 1968. 240 p. [Harvard Univ., Boston, MA and South San Francisco Unified Sch. District, San Francisco, CA]
This work summarized the evidence that expectations held by behavioral researchers for the responses of their research subjects could come to serve as self-fulfilling prophecies. In addition, the results of the first experiment to demonstrate that teachers’ expectations could affect the actual intellectual performance of their pupils is reported. [The Science Citation Index® (SCI®) and the Social Sciences Citation Index™ (SSCI™) indicate that this book has been cited over 700 times since 1968.]
Robert Rosenthal
Department of Psychology and Social Relations Harvard University Cambridge, MA 02138
January 2, 1980
“In 1963 I published a paper in the American Scientist, summarizing the evidence that experimenters’ expectations might affect the responses obtained from their research subjects within the context of the psychological experiment.1 I ended that paper by suggesting that the same type of self-fulfilling prophecy might operate in the classroom such that teachers’ expectations for the intellectual performance of their pupils might actually affect those pupils’ intellectual performance. Shortly after publication of this article I received a letter from a most unusual school principal, Lenore Jacobson. She wanted to know whether this suggestion (a) was part of the rhetoric of scientific writing (i.e., the ‘suggestions for future research’) or (b) was really going to get done. If it were to be the latter she knew of a school where the experiment could be conducted: hers.
“The results of our collaborative research were reported in this book and were greeted by an awesomely bimodal response: you loved it or you hated it. There were good reasons to love it and bad reasons to love it.The chief good reason to love it was that it was a well-designed and well-conducted study on an important question. The chief bad reason to love it was that it implied to the environmental theorists (of the origins of IQ differences) that ‘genes don’t matter;’ it implied no such thing, of course. There were good reasons to hate it and bad reasons to hate it. The chief good reason to hate it was that you didn’t think of it first. The chief bad reason to hate it was that it implied to the genetic theorists (of the origins of IQ differences) that ‘genes don’t matter;’ it implied no such thing, of course. There were also some wonderfully inept statistical critiques of the Pygmalion research. This got lots of publications for the critics of our research including one whole book aimed at devastating the Pygmalion results, which only showed that the results were even more significant than Lenore Jacobson and I had claimed.
“In recent years there have been many replications of the Pygmalion effect and even more replications of the more general finding of interpersonal self-fulfilling prophecies. Altogether, 345 studies have been conducted and they show beyond doubt that interpersonal self-fulfilling prophecies not only occur, but that their average size of effect is far from trivial.2 Morerecent work on Pygmalion effects has also ledto the development of a four factor theory of the mediation of teacher expectancy effects and the development of instruments to measure pupils’ sensitivity to the nonverbal cues emitted by their teachers.3,4 The work goes on and it continues to be fun.
“This work may have been cited frequently because it addressed experimentally a question of both scientific importance and social relevance and because of the extreme praise and criticism it evoked.
1. Roacathal R. On the social psychology of the psychological experiment: the experimenter’s hypothesis as unintended determinant of experimental results. Amer. Sci. 51:268-83, 1963.
2. Rosenthal R & Rabin D B. Interpersonal expectancy effects: the first 345 studies. Behav. Brain Sci. 1:377-86, 1978.
3. Rotenthal R. On the social psychology of the self-fulfilling prophecy: further evidence for Pygmalion effects and their mediating mechanisms. Module 53. New York: MSS Modular Publications, Inc., 1974.28 p.
4. Rotenthal R, Hall J A, DiMatteo M R, Rogers P L & Archer D. Sensitivity to nonverbal communication: the PONS test. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 1979. 432 p.
-----------------------------------
羅森塔爾效應,美國心理學家羅 森塔爾考查某校,隨意從每班抽3名學生共18人寫在一張表格上,交給校長,極為認真地說:“這18名學生經過科學測定智商很高。”事過半年,羅氏又來到該 校,發現這18名學生的確表現超常。羅森塔爾效應就是期望心理中的共鳴現象。運用到人事管理中,就要求領導對下屬要投入感情、希望和特別的誘導,使下屬得 以發揮自身的主動性和創造性。如領導在交辦某一項任務 時,不妨對下屬說:“我相信你一定能辦好”、“我想早點聽到你成功的消息。”這樣下屬就會朝你期待的 方向發展,人才也就在期待之中得以產生。
羅森塔爾效應是一種期待效應。羅森塔爾(Robert Rosenthal)1966年設計了一些實驗,試圖證明實驗者的偏見會影響研究結果。羅森塔爾及其同事,要求教師們對他們所教的小學生進行智力測驗。他們告訴教師們,班上有些學生屬於大器晚成者,並把這些學生名字念給老師聽。羅森塔爾認為,這些學生的學習成績可望得到改善。事實上所有大器晚成者的名單,是從學生中隨機挑選出來的,與班上其他學生沒有顯著不同。可是學期末,再次對這些學生進行智力測驗時,他們的成績顯著優於第一次測得的結果。這種結局羅森塔爾認為,可能是因為老師們認為這些大器晚成的學生開始嶄露頭角,予以特別照顧和關懷,以致使他們的成績得以改善。這就是著名的羅森塔爾效應。
羅森塔爾效應-概述
羅森塔爾效應(RobertRosenthal Effect)是指人們的信念、成見和期望對所研究的物件產生的影響。這種效應是R.羅森塔爾等人在其著名實驗中發現的。在教育社會心理學中,人們把對某人或某事始終懷著憧憬、期待、熱愛、關懷之情而發生意想不到的效果,稱之為羅森塔爾效應。
羅森塔爾效應
1968年,羅森塔爾和L.雅各森從小學1~6年級的每個年級中各隨機抽取 3個班為實驗組進行預測未來發展的實驗(即智力測驗)。根據測驗結果,估計各班(每班抽取20%的學生)在這個學期中有哪些學生將有顯著的進步,並將這些學生的名字通報任課教師。8個月後,再行測驗。結果表明:被指為可能發展的實驗組學生,與控制組學生相比,確像教師期待的那樣,智商有所提高,1、2年級學生更為明顯(見圖)。在品格方面也有類似的結果。教師寄以期望的學生較之教師不期望的學生,具有“更有順應能力”、“求知欲更強”、“情誼更深”等傾向。這結果意味著,教師在同寄以期望的學生相處時,可能態度與對別人不同,致使自己的期待微妙地傳給學生。
隨後的研究獲得的結果卻並不一致,有些實驗者並未取得同樣的效應。看來師生之間的影響是雙向的,影響的程度存在著個別差異,很難說清學生的反應有多 少受教師期待的影響。而且,期待常常以行為中極細微的差別來傳遞,也很難度量,但是,不管研究結果多麼不一致,學生往往對教師的期望作出反應是有心理學根據的。教師的期望對學生起隱蔽的強化作用。1972年J.E.布羅菲和T.L.古德曾評論羅森塔爾效應的最初研究與許多重複實驗,肯定教師對學生的看法能夠影響學生。他們在70年代的一些研究中,發現教師無意中強化高分學生的正確答案甚于低分學生,給高分學生提供更多的回饋。他們認為教師對學生的強化是根據他們對學生的期望,學生則以證實期望的方式來反應。這個解釋已被心理學界接受。教師對學生寄託期望對學生來說是件好事,重要的是教師應對每個學生的長處或優點都寄託期望,在每個學生身上都能產生羅森塔爾效應。
羅森塔爾效應-效應來源
羅森塔爾
“羅 森塔爾效應”產生於美國著名心理學家羅森塔爾的一次有名的實驗中:他和助手來到一所小學,聲稱要進行一個“未來發展趨勢測驗”,並煞有介事地以讚賞的口 吻,將一份“最有發展前途者”的名單交給了校長和相關教師,叮囑他們務必要保密,以免影響實驗的正確性。其實他撒了一個“權威性謊言”,因為名單上的學生根本就是隨機挑選出來的。8個月後,奇跡出現了,凡是上了名單的學生,個個成績都有了較大的進步,且各方面都很優秀。
自尊、自信和自強,從而使各方面得到了異乎尋常的進步。
顯然,羅森塔爾的“權威性謊言”發生了作用,因為這個謊言對教師產生了暗示,左右了教師對名單上學生的能力的評價;而教師又將自已的這一心理活動通過情緒、語言和行為傳染給了學生,使他們強烈地感受到來自教師的熱愛和期望,變得更加在這裡,教師對這部分學生的期待是真誠的、發自內心的,因為他們受到了權威者的影響,堅信這部分學生就是最有發展潛力的。也正因如此,教師的一言一行都難以隱藏對這些學生的信任與期待,而這種“真誠的期待”是學生能夠感受到的。
女性的美女像,久久依伴,竟對自己的作品產生了愛慕之情。他祈求愛神阿佛羅狄忒賦予雕像以生命。阿佛羅狄忒為他的真誠愛情所感動,就使這座美女雕像活了起來。皮格馬利翁遂稱她為伽拉忒亞,並娶她為妻。在這個故事中,皮格馬利翁的期待也是真誠的,沒有這種真誠,自然無法打動愛神。
其實,羅森塔爾的這個實驗是受希臘神話的啟發的,這個神話的大意是說,賽普勒斯國王皮格馬利翁性情孤僻,為規避賽普勒斯妓女而一人獨居。他善雕刻,孤寂中用象牙雕刻了一座表現他的理想中的羅森塔爾效應-實驗分析
羅森塔爾效應