研究生英語-安全帶的隱患 原文+翻譯

It'salmostacommonsensethatwearingaseatbeltcankeeppassengersfrombeinginjuredorbeingkilledinacaraccident.ButrecentresearchdonebyJohnAdamsshowsmorecomplicatedstatistics.Morecaraccidentsarecausedbytherecklessdriverswhowearseatbelts.THEHIDDENDANGEROFSEATBELTSDavidBjerklie1Seatbeltsstilldecreaseourriskofdyinginanaccident,butthestatisticsarenotallblackandwhite.Infact,accordingtooneresearcher,seatbeltsmayactuallycausepeopletodrivemorerecklessly.2Ifthere'sonethingweknowaboutourriskyworld,it'sthatseatbeltssavelives.Andtheydo,ofcourse.Butreality,asusual,ismessierandmorecomplicatedthanthat.JohnAdams,riskexpertandemeritusprofessorofgeographyatUniversityCollegeLondon,wasanearlyskepticoftheseatbeltsafetymantra.Adamsfirstbegantolookatthenumbersmorethan25yearsago.Whathefoundwasthatcontrarytoconventionalwisdom,mandatingtheuseofseatbeltsin18countriesresultedineithernochangeoractuallyanetincreaseinroadaccidentdeaths.3Howcanthatbe?Adams'interpretationofthedatarestsonthenotionofriskcompensation,theideathatindividualstendtoadjusttheirbehaviorinresponsetowhattheyperceive;aschangesinthelevelofrisk.Imagine,explainsAdams,adrivernegotiatingacurveintheroad.Let'smakehimayoungmale.Heisgoingtobeinfluencedbyhisperceptionsofboththerisksandrewardsofdrivingacar.Theconsiderationscouldincludegettingtoworkormeetingamendfordinnerontime,impressingacompanionwithhisdrivingskills,bolsteringhisimageofhimselfasanaccomplisheddriver.Theycouldalsoincludehisconcernforhisownsafetyanddesiretolivetoaripeoldage,hisfeelingsofresponsibilityforatoddlerwithhiminacarseat,thecostofbanginguphisshinynewcarorlosinghislicense.Norwillthesepossibleconcernsexistinavacuum.Hewillbetakingintoaccounttheweatherandtheconditionoftheroad,theamountoftrafficandthecapabilitiesofthecarheisdriving.Butcrucially,saysAdams,thisdriverwillalsobeadjustinghisbehaviorinresponsetowhatheperceivesarechangesinrisks.Ifheiswearingaseatbeltandhiscarhasfrontandsideairbagsandanti-skidbrakestoboot,hemayinturndriveabitmoredaringly.4Thepoint,stressesAdams,isthatdriverswhofeelsafemayactuallyincreasetheriskthattheyposetootherdrivers,bicyclists,pedestriansandtheirownpassengers(whileanaverageof80%ofdriversbuckleup,only68%oftheirrear-seatpassengersdo).Andriskcompensationishardlyconfinedtotheactofdrivingacar.Thinkofatrapezeartist,suggestsAdams,orarockclimberormotorcyclist.Addsomesafetyequipmenttotheequation-anet,ropeorhelmetrespectively-andthepersonmaytrymaneuversthatheorshewouldotherwiseconsiderfoolish.Inthecaseofseatbelts,insteadofasimple,straightforwardreductionindeaths,theendresultisactuallyamorecomplicatedredistributionofriskandfatalities.Forthesakeofargument,offersAdams,imaginehowitmightaffectthebehaviorofdriversifasharpstakeweremountedinthemiddleofthesteeringwheel?Orifthebumperwerepackedwithexplosives.Perverse,yes,butitcertainlyprovidesavividexampleofhowaperceptionofriskcouldmodifybehavior.5Ineverydaylife,riskisamovingtarget,notasetnumberasstatisticsmightsuggest.Inadditiontoexternalfactors,eachindividualhashisorherowninternalcomfortlevelwithrisk-taking.Somearedaringwhileothersarecautiousbynature.Andstillothersarefatalistswhomaybelievethatahigherpowerdevisesmortalityschedulesthatfixapredeterminedtimewhenournumberisup.Consequently,anysinglemeasurementassignedtotheriskofdrivingacarisboundtobeonlytheroughestsortofbenchmark.Adamscites,asanexamplethestatisticalfactthatayoungmanis100timesmorelikelytobeinvolvedinaseverecrashthanisamiddle-agedwoman.Similarly,someonedrivingat3:00a.m.Sundayismorethan100timesmorelikelytodiethansomeonedrivingat10:00a.m.Sunday.Someonewithapersonalitydisorderis10timesmorelikelytodie.Andlet'ssayhe'salsodrunk.TallyupAllthesefactorsandconsiderthemindependentlysaysAdams,andyoucouldarriveat.astatisticalpredictionthatadisturbed,drunkenyoungmandrivinginthemiddleofthenightis2.7milliontimesmorelikelytobeinvolvedinaseriousaccidentthanwouldasober,middle-agedwomandrivingtochurchsevenhourslater.6Thebottomlineisthatriskdoesn'texistinavacuumandthatthereareahostoffactorsthatcomeintoplay,includingtherewardsofrisk,whethertheyarefinancial,physicaloremotional.Itisthisveryhumancontextwhichriskexists.Thatiskey,saysAdams,whotitledoneofhisrecentblogs:WhatKillsYouMatters-NotNumbers.Ourreactiontoriskverymuchdependsonthedegreetowhichitisvoluntary(scubadiving),unavoidable(publictransit)orimposed(airquality),thedegreetowhichwefeelweareincontrol(driving)oratthemercyofothers(planetravel),andthedegreetowhichthesourceofpossibledangerisbenign("doctor'sorders),indifferent(nature)ormalign,(murderandterrorism).Wemakedozensofriskcalculationsdaily,butyoucanbookodds-thatmostofthemaresoautomaticorvisceral-thatwebarelynoticethem.翻譯安全帶的隱患Thehiddendangerofseatbelts安全帶可以避免乘客在車禍中受傷或死亡，這幾乎是常識(shí)。但是，約翰．亞當(dāng)斯最近所做的研究得出了更加復(fù)雜的統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)。當(dāng)司機(jī)系著安全帶時(shí)，他們開車無所顧忌，更多車禍因此而發(fā)生。座椅安全帶固然能降低我們?cè)谲嚨溨兴劳龅奈ｋU(xiǎn)，但從統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)據(jù)看，情況并不是那么絕對(duì)。事實(shí)上，據(jù)一位研究者說，安全帶可能會(huì)使人們?cè)隈{車時(shí)更加肆無忌憚。對(duì)于這個(gè)有危險(xiǎn)的世界，如果有一件事我們還算了解，那就是座椅安全帶可以救命。當(dāng)然，它確實(shí)可以救命。但實(shí)際情況通常要更混亂、更復(fù)雜。倫敦大學(xué)學(xué)院的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)專家、地理學(xué)榮譽(yù)教授約翰·亞當(dāng)斯早就質(zhì)疑安全帶能保證駕車安全的信條。亞當(dāng)斯最早開始查看統(tǒng)計(jì)數(shù)字是早在25年前的事了。他的發(fā)現(xiàn)與人們的普遍看法恰恰相反——在18個(gè)強(qiáng)制使用安全帶的國家，要么交通事故死亡率根本沒有變化，要么實(shí)際上反而導(dǎo)致了死亡率的凈增長。怎么會(huì)這樣?亞當(dāng)斯用風(fēng)險(xiǎn)補(bǔ)償?shù)母拍顏斫忉屵@些數(shù)據(jù)資料，這個(gè)概念就是：人們往往會(huì)根據(jù)他們意識(shí)到的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)程度的改變來相應(yīng)地調(diào)整自己的行為。亞當(dāng)斯解釋說，假設(shè)一位司機(jī)駕車途中要過一個(gè)窄彎道，這名司機(jī)是個(gè)男青年，那么他會(huì)受到自己對(duì)以下兩方面認(rèn)知的影響：駕車的風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和駕車的回報(bào)。他所考慮的東西可能包括：能夠準(zhǔn)時(shí)上班或準(zhǔn)時(shí)趕赴朋友的飯局、讓同伴對(duì)他的駕車技術(shù)留下深刻印象、使自己作為熟練駕車手的形象更加鞏固。他還可能考慮到自身的安全問題、長命百歲的愿望、對(duì)車上年幼乘客的責(zé)任感、撞毀自己的漂亮新車或駕駛證被沒收的代價(jià)。這些可能的擔(dān)心也不是孤立存在的。他還要考慮到天氣和路況、交通擁擠的程度和所駕車子的性能。但亞當(dāng)斯說，關(guān)鍵的是這個(gè)司機(jī)還將根據(jù)他對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)變化的判斷來調(diào)整自己的行為。如果他系上了安全帶，而他的車子帶有前、側(cè)氣囊和防滑剎車系統(tǒng)，他駕起車來可能會(huì)更大膽。亞當(dāng)斯強(qiáng)調(diào)說，問題就在于自我感覺安全的司機(jī)們實(shí)際上對(duì)其他司機(jī)、騎自行車者、行人和自己車上的乘客來說是更大的危險(xiǎn)(平均80％的司機(jī)系安全帶，而同車后座的乘客只有68％系安全帶)。風(fēng)險(xiǎn)補(bǔ)償絕不僅限于駕車行為。亞當(dāng)斯說，類似的還有表演高空秋千的藝人、攀巖者或摩托車手。如果在他們的安全等式上增添某種安全裝置——比如說分別給他們一張救生網(wǎng)、一根保險(xiǎn)繩或一個(gè)頭盔——這個(gè)人可能就會(huì)試著做些平時(shí)認(rèn)為很愚蠢的技巧性表演。因此，安全帶并非簡單、直截了當(dāng)?shù)販p少死亡人數(shù)，而是對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)和死亡事故進(jìn)行了更加復(fù)雜的再分配。為了說明其中的道理，亞當(dāng)斯提出人們可以想象一下，如果在方向盤中間安一個(gè)尖頭的木樁，司機(jī)開車時(shí)會(huì)受到怎樣的影響?或者在保險(xiǎn)杠上裝滿炸藥呢?這簡直是喪心病狂，是的，不過這確實(shí)提供了一個(gè)生動(dòng)的例子，來說明人們?nèi)绾胃鶕?jù)對(duì)風(fēng)險(xiǎn)的