HL extensions: culture, motivation, technology and data
International Baccalaureate · IB Diploma · Psychology · HL Topic 4 7:56 English narration · English + 中文 subtitles burned in
Chapters
Transcript
In 2021 China limited online games for under-18s to one hour on Friday, Saturday and Sunday evenings and on public holidays.
2021 年，中国把未成年人玩网络游戏的时间限制为周五、周六、周日晚上及法定节假日每天一小时。
The rule rests on three claims: about technology, that games harm young people; about motivation, that games are designed to keep players playing; and about culture, what families and schools expect of children.
这项规定基于三个说法：技术方面，游戏伤害年轻人；动机方面，游戏被设计成让玩家停不下来；文化方面，家庭和学校对孩子的期望。
Are the claims true?
这些说法是真的吗？
A Paper 3 answer looks at the data before it agrees.
试卷三的答案在同意之前要先看数据。
HL students study two extensions of 45 hours each: the role of culture, motivation and technology in behaviour, and data analysis and interpretation.
高级课程学生学习两个各 45 小时的拓展：文化、动机和技术在行为中的作用，以及数据分析与解读。
Paper 3, 1 hour 45 minutes and 30 marks, joins them.
试卷三把两者结合起来，时长 1 小时 45 分钟，共 30 分。
You get four to six sources with research findings on one topic, and answer four questions worth 3, 6, 6 and 15 marks.
你会拿到关于一个话题的四到六份研究资料，回答四道题，分值分别为 3、6、6 和 15 分。
Hofstede described cultural dimensions, ways in which national cultures differ on average.
霍夫斯泰德描述了文化维度，即各国文化平均而言的差异方式。
The best known is individualism–collectivism: in individualist cultures people see themselves mainly as separate persons; in collectivist cultures mainly as members of groups.
最著名的是个人主义与集体主义：在个人主义文化中，人们主要把自己看作独立的个体；在集体主义文化中，主要看作群体成员。
These are averages: many people in any country do not fit them.
这些只是平均值，任何国家都有许多人不符合。
Culture shapes how we explain behaviour.
文化影响我们如何解释行为。
Morris and Peng compared reports of the same two murders in an English-language and a Chinese-language newspaper in the United States.
莫里斯和彭凯平比较了美国一家英文报纸和一家中文报纸对同样两起谋杀案的报道。
The English reports blamed the killers' personalities more; the Chinese reports pointed more to the situation, such as the killer's relationships and pressures.
英文报道更多归咎于凶手的性格；中文报道更多指向情境，例如凶手的人际关系和压力。
Culture also matters for research itself.
文化对研究本身也很重要。
Henrich and colleagues found that about 96 percent of participants in top psychology journals came from Western, industrialised countries, which hold only about 12 percent of the world's population.
亨里奇等人发现，顶级心理学期刊中约百分之 96 的参与者来自西方工业化国家，而这些国家只占世界人口的约百分之 12。
They called these samples WEIRD.
他们称这些样本为 WEIRD。
An etic approach applies one idea in every culture; an emic approach studies a culture from the inside, in its own terms.
客位方法把同一观点用于所有文化；主位方法从内部、用该文化自己的方式研究它。
Findings from WEIRD samples should be tested before they are applied to students in China.
来自 WEIRD 样本的发现，在应用于中国学生之前应先检验。
Intrinsic motivation comes from enjoying the activity; extrinsic motivation comes from rewards or punishments.
内在动机来自享受活动本身；外在动机来自奖励或惩罚。
Self-determination theory, from Deci and Ryan, says people are most motivated when three needs are met: autonomy, which is choice; competence, feeling able; and relatedness, feeling connected to others.
德西和瑞安的自我决定理论认为，当三种需要得到满足时，人们的动机最强：自主，即有选择；胜任，即感到自己有能力；归属，即感到与他人相连。
Rewards can reduce intrinsic motivation.
奖励可能降低内在动机。
Lepper, Greene and Nisbett studied preschool children who liked to draw.
莱珀、格林和尼斯贝特研究了喜欢画画的学前儿童。
Some were promised a certificate for drawing; others were not.
一些孩子被许诺画画能得奖状，另一些没有。
One to two weeks later, in free time, the children who had expected the certificate spent about 9 percent of their time drawing, compared with about 17 to 18 percent in the other groups.
一到两周后的自由时间里，期待奖状的孩子只用约百分之 9 的时间画画，其他组约为百分之 17 到 18。
The reward becomes the reason, so without it the activity loses its pull.
奖励成了理由，没有奖励，活动就失去了吸引力。
Game designers use the other side of this, with points, levels and streaks.
游戏设计者利用的是另一面：积分、等级和连续打卡。
Many people believe social media makes teenagers unhappy.
许多人认为社交媒体让青少年不快乐。
Orben and Przybylski analysed three large data sets with more than 350,000 teenagers.
奥本和普日比尔斯基分析了三个大型数据集，涉及 35 万多名青少年。
Technology use did have a negative link with well-being, but it explained at most 0.4 percent of the differences in well-being, about as much as eating potatoes did.
技术使用与幸福感确实有负相关，但最多只能解释幸福感差异的百分之 0.4，与吃土豆的影响差不多。
The data were correlational, so they cannot show the direction of cause: unhappy teenagers may also use more social media.
数据是相关性的，无法显示因果方向：不快乐的青少年也可能更多使用社交媒体。
Ward and colleagues gave students working-memory tests with their phone on the desk, face down and silent; in a bag; or in another room.
沃德等人让学生做工作记忆测试，手机分别放在桌上（屏幕朝下、静音）、包里或另一个房间。
Students did best with the phone in another room, even though they did not use it.
手机在另一个房间时学生表现最好，尽管他们并没有使用手机。
Later studies did not always find the effect, which is a reason to wait for replications before changing school rules.
后来的研究并不总能发现这一效应，所以在改变校规之前应等待重复研究。
To describe numbers, start with the centre.
描述数字先看中心。
The mean is the total divided by the number of scores, but it is affected by extreme scores; the median, the middle score, suits data with extremes; the mode, the most common score, suits categories.
平均数是总和除以分数个数，但会受极端值影响；中位数是中间的分数，适合有极端值的数据；众数是最常见的分数，适合类别数据。
Then the spread: the range is the highest minus the lowest, and the standard deviation is the typical distance of scores from the mean.
然后看离散程度：极差是最高减最低，标准差是分数离平均数的典型距离。
A difference between two means matters only if it is large compared with the standard deviation.
两个平均数之间的差异，只有相对标准差足够大才有意义。
An inferential test gives a p-value: the chance of a difference this big if the null hypothesis were true.
推断统计检验给出 p 值：如果零假设成立，出现这么大差异的概率。
A result is usually called statistically significant when p is less than 0.05.
当 p 小于 0.05 时，结果通常称为统计显著。
But a significant result can still be a small effect, and one from a small sample may not repeat.
但显著的结果仍可能效应很小，小样本的结果也可能无法重复。
A correlation coefficient, r, runs from minus 1 to plus 1.
相关系数 r 从负 1 到正 1。
Near 0 means no linear relationship, 0.5 is moderate, and 1 is perfect.
接近 0 表示没有线性关系，0.5 是中等，1 是完全相关。
A negative r means one variable goes down as the other goes up.
负的 r 表示一个变量上升时另一个下降。
Thematic analysis turns interview transcripts into themes.
主题分析把访谈转录稿变成主题。
Content analysis counts how often coded categories appear, which turns words into numbers.
内容分析统计编码类别出现的次数，把文字变成数字。
Two coders working on the same data check each other: if they agree on 16 of 20 statements, their agreement is 80 percent.
两名编码者处理同一份数据，相互核对：如果 20 条陈述中有 16 条一致，一致率就是百分之 80。
The claim: the use of technology in school may have a negative effect on students' mental health.
论点：在学校使用技术可能对学生心理健康有负面影响。
Source A compares mean anxiety: 14.2 with phones collected and 16.1 with phones allowed.
资料 A 比较平均焦虑分：收走手机时 14.2，允许手机时 16.1。
Question 1, 3 marks: explain one issue that limits the data.
第 1 题 3 分：解释一个限制数据解读的问题。
The two groups were whole classes, not randomly allocated, so they may differ in other ways, such as teacher or timetable.
两组是两个整班，没有随机分配，可能在老师或课表等方面不同。
And the difference in means, 1.9, is small compared with standard deviations of about 5, so it may be due to chance.
而且平均数相差 1.9，与约为 5 的标准差相比很小，可能出于偶然。
Question 2, 6 marks: analyse Source B and link it to the claim.
第 2 题 6 分：分析资料 B 并联系论点。
Describe the pattern: r is minus 0.56, a moderate negative correlation; more screen time goes with less sleep, from about 6 to 9 hours.
描述规律：r 为负 0.56，中等负相关；屏幕时间越多，睡眠越少，范围约 6 到 9 小时。
Then the limit: it is one survey of self-reported hours, and correlation does not show cause.
然后指出局限：这是一项自我报告时长的调查，相关不等于因果。
Conclusion: Source B supports a link between screen time and sleep, and poor sleep can harm mental health, but it does not show that technology causes the harm.
结论：资料 B 支持屏幕时间与睡眠之间存在联系，睡眠差会损害心理健康，但它没有证明技术导致了伤害。
Question 3, 6 marks, asks how to improve credibility.
第 3 题 6 分，问如何提高可信度。
For quantitative sources: random allocation, larger samples, objective measures such as sleep trackers, and replication.
定量资料：随机分配、扩大样本、使用睡眠追踪器等客观测量，以及重复研究。
For qualitative sources: triangulation, a second coder, and checking the themes with the participants.
定性资料：三角验证、第二名编码者，以及与参与者核对主题。
Question 4, 15 marks, asks to what extent we can conclude the claim.
第 4 题 15 分，问我们能在多大程度上得出该论点。
Use all the sources: group those that support it and those that do not, weigh them with causality, measurement and bias, and end with a judgement.
使用所有资料：把支持和不支持的分组，用因果关系、测量和偏差加以权衡，最后给出判断。
For example: a small negative link, but the designs cannot show cause, so the claim is only partly supported.
例如：存在微弱的负相关，但研究设计无法显示因果，所以论点只得到部分支持。
Check yourself.
自我检查。
Culture: individualism–collectivism, Morris and Peng, WEIRD samples, emic and etic.
文化：个人主义与集体主义、莫里斯和彭凯平、WEIRD 样本、主位和客位。
Motivation: intrinsic and extrinsic, the three needs, and the overjustification effect.
动机：内在和外在动机、三种需要以及过度理由效应。
Technology: Orben and Przybylski, the phone on the desk, and the Google effect.
技术：奥本和普日比尔斯基、桌上的手机以及谷歌效应。
Data: mean, median, mode, range, standard deviation, p-values, correlation, and thematic and content analysis.
数据：平均数、中位数、众数、极差、标准差、p 值、相关，以及主题分析和内容分析。
And Paper 3: four questions, read each source, judge its quality, and weigh them all before a final judgement.
试卷三：四道题，读懂每份资料，评判其质量，权衡全部资料后再下最终判断。