认知神经科学视角：新研究力求解释“曼德拉效应”这一共有虚假记忆现象
New study seeks to explain the ‘Mandela Effect’ – the bizarre phenomenon of shared false memories
译文简介
在大多数情况下，人们在媒体中看到的C-3PO只有上半身。错记成金色的腿，可能是他们沿用了之前的知识来填补这一空白的结果，即身体通常只有一种颜色。
正文翻译
（本文发表于2022年9月23日，作者来自达特茅斯学院和芝加哥大学）
Imagine the Monopoly Man.
Is he wearing a monocle or not?
If you pictured the character from the popular board game wearing one, you’d be wrong. In fact, he has never worn one.
If you’re surprised by this, you’re not alone. Many people possess the same false memory of this character. This phenomenon takes place for other characters, logos and quotes, too. For example, Pikachu from Pokémon is often thought to have a black tip on his tail, which he doesn’t have. And many people are convinced that the fruit of the Loom logo includes a cornucopia. It doesn’t.
想象一下“大富翁”。
他是否戴着单片眼镜？
如果在你的脑海中，这个热门棋盘游戏中的人物是戴着单片眼镜的，那你就错了。事实上，他从来没有戴过。
如果你对此感到惊讶，那你并不孤单。很多人对这个人物的记忆同样是错误的。这种现象也发生在其他人物、标志和引语上。比如，人们常会以为《口袋妖怪》中皮卡丘的尾巴上有一个黑色的尾巴尖，而他并没有。很多人都笃信水果织机（Fruit of the Loom）的品牌标志中包含一个丰饶之角。然而并没有。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
Is he wearing a monocle or not?
If you pictured the character from the popular board game wearing one, you’d be wrong. In fact, he has never worn one.
If you’re surprised by this, you’re not alone. Many people possess the same false memory of this character. This phenomenon takes place for other characters, logos and quotes, too. For example, Pikachu from Pokémon is often thought to have a black tip on his tail, which he doesn’t have. And many people are convinced that the fruit of the Loom logo includes a cornucopia. It doesn’t.
想象一下“大富翁”。
他是否戴着单片眼镜？
如果在你的脑海中，这个热门棋盘游戏中的人物是戴着单片眼镜的，那你就错了。事实上，他从来没有戴过。
如果你对此感到惊讶，那你并不孤单。很多人对这个人物的记忆同样是错误的。这种现象也发生在其他人物、标志和引语上。比如，人们常会以为《口袋妖怪》中皮卡丘的尾巴上有一个黑色的尾巴尖，而他并没有。很多人都笃信水果织机（Fruit of the Loom）的品牌标志中包含一个丰饶之角。然而并没有。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
We call this phenomenon of shared false memories for certain cultural icons the “visual Mandela Effect.”
People tend to be puzzled when they learn that they share the same false memories with other people. That’s partly because they assume that what they remember and forget ought to be subjective and based on their own personal experiences.
However, research we have conducted shows that people tend to remember and forget the same images as one another, regardless of the diversity of their individual experiences. Recently, we have shown these similarities in our memories even extend to our false memories.
我们把这种对特定文化图标的共同错误记忆现象称为“视觉曼德拉效应”。
当人们得知他们与其他人拥有相同的错误记忆时，往往会困惑不解。这部分是因为他们以为自己的记忆和遗忘应该是主观的，而且是基于自己的个人体验。
然而，我们开展的研究表明，人们往往会和身旁人一样记住和遗忘同一批形象，无论他们的个人体验多样化程度如何都是如此。最近，我们已经证明了我们记忆中的这些相似存在甚至会延展为我们的虚假记忆。
People tend to be puzzled when they learn that they share the same false memories with other people. That’s partly because they assume that what they remember and forget ought to be subjective and based on their own personal experiences.
However, research we have conducted shows that people tend to remember and forget the same images as one another, regardless of the diversity of their individual experiences. Recently, we have shown these similarities in our memories even extend to our false memories.
我们把这种对特定文化图标的共同错误记忆现象称为“视觉曼德拉效应”。
当人们得知他们与其他人拥有相同的错误记忆时，往往会困惑不解。这部分是因为他们以为自己的记忆和遗忘应该是主观的，而且是基于自己的个人体验。
然而，我们开展的研究表明，人们往往会和身旁人一样记住和遗忘同一批形象，无论他们的个人体验多样化程度如何都是如此。最近，我们已经证明了我们记忆中的这些相似存在甚至会延展为我们的虚假记忆。
What is the Mandela Effect?
什么是曼德拉效应？
什么是曼德拉效应？
The term “Mandela Effect” was coined by Fiona Broome, a self-described paranormal researcher, to describe her false memory of former South African president Nelson Mandela dying in prison in the 1980s. She realized that many other people also shared this same false memory and wrote an article about her experience on her website. The concept of shared false memories spread to other forums and websites, including Reddit.
“曼德拉效应”一词是由自称是超自然现象研究者的菲奥娜·布鲁姆创造的，用来描述她的“南非前总统纳尔逊·曼德拉在八十年代死在了监狱中”这段虚假记忆。当时她意识到其他很多人也同样拥有这段虚假记忆，于是在她的网站上写了一篇有关她经历的文章。这种共有虚假记忆的概念播散到了其他论坛和网站，包括红迪论坛。
“曼德拉效应”一词是由自称是超自然现象研究者的菲奥娜·布鲁姆创造的，用来描述她的“南非前总统纳尔逊·曼德拉在八十年代死在了监狱中”这段虚假记忆。当时她意识到其他很多人也同样拥有这段虚假记忆，于是在她的网站上写了一篇有关她经历的文章。这种共有虚假记忆的概念播散到了其他论坛和网站，包括红迪论坛。
Since then, examples of the Mandela Effect have been widely shared on the internet. These include names like “the Berenstain Bears,” a children’s book series that is falsely remembered as spelled “-ein” instead of “-ain,” and characters like Star Wars’ C-3PO, who is falsely remembered with two gold legs instead of one gold and one silver leg.
自那时起，曼德拉效应的例子就在互联网上广为转发。这些例子包括“the Berenstain Bears（贝伦斯坦熊）”之类的名字，这是一个少儿读物系列，其拼写被错误地记忆为“-ein ”而不是“-ain”，以及像《星球大战》中C-3PO之类的人物，被错误地记忆为有两条金色的腿而不是一条金色的腿和一条银色的腿。
自那时起，曼德拉效应的例子就在互联网上广为转发。这些例子包括“the Berenstain Bears（贝伦斯坦熊）”之类的名字，这是一个少儿读物系列，其拼写被错误地记忆为“-ein ”而不是“-ain”，以及像《星球大战》中C-3PO之类的人物，被错误地记忆为有两条金色的腿而不是一条金色的腿和一条银色的腿。
（译注：《贝伦斯坦熊》曾被拍成动画喜剧系列，播放于2003-2006年）
The Mandela Effect became fodder for conspiracists – the false memories so strong and so specific that some people see them as evidence of an alternate dimension.
Because of that, scientific research has only studied the Mandela Effect as an example of how conspiracy theories spread on the internet. There has been very little research looking into the Mandela Effect as a memory phenomenon.
But understanding why these icons trigger such specific false memories might give us more insight into how false memories form. The visual Mandela Effect, which affects icons specifically, was a perfect way to study this.
曼德拉效应成为了阴谋论者的素材：虚假记忆如此根深蒂固，如此须眉毕现，以至于有些人将其视为存在另一个维度的证据。
正因如此，科学研究只是将曼德拉效应作为阴谋论在互联网上扩散的一个例子来研究。很少有研究会将曼德拉效应作为一种记忆现象来研究。
但去理解为什么这些图标会触发宛然如生的虚假记忆，也许能让我们更深入地洞悉虚假记忆是如何形成的。专门影响图标的视觉曼德拉效应是研究这个问题的一个完美方法。
Because of that, scientific research has only studied the Mandela Effect as an example of how conspiracy theories spread on the internet. There has been very little research looking into the Mandela Effect as a memory phenomenon.
But understanding why these icons trigger such specific false memories might give us more insight into how false memories form. The visual Mandela Effect, which affects icons specifically, was a perfect way to study this.
曼德拉效应成为了阴谋论者的素材：虚假记忆如此根深蒂固，如此须眉毕现，以至于有些人将其视为存在另一个维度的证据。
正因如此，科学研究只是将曼德拉效应作为阴谋论在互联网上扩散的一个例子来研究。很少有研究会将曼德拉效应作为一种记忆现象来研究。
但去理解为什么这些图标会触发宛然如生的虚假记忆，也许能让我们更深入地洞悉虚假记忆是如何形成的。专门影响图标的视觉曼德拉效应是研究这个问题的一个完美方法。
A robust false memory phenomenon
一种非常坚挺的虚假记忆现象
一种非常坚挺的虚假记忆现象
To see whether the visual Mandela Effect really exists, we ran an experiment in which we presented people with three versions of the same icon. One was correct and two were manipulated, and we asked them to sext the correct one. There were 40 sets of icons, and they included C-3PO from the Star Wars franchise, the Fruit of the Loom logo and the Monopoly Man from the board game.
In the results, which have been accepted for publication in the journal Psychological Sciences, we found that people fared very poorly on seven of them, only choosing the correct one around or less than 33% of the time. For these seven images, people consistently identified the same incorrect version, not just randomly choosing one of the two incorrect versions. In addition, participants reported being very confident in their choices and having high familiarity with these icons despite being wrong.
Put together, it’s clear evidence of the phenomenon that people on the internet have talked about for years: The visual Mandela Effect is a real and consistent memory error.
为了检视视觉曼德拉效应是否真的存在，我们做了一个实验，在实验中向参与者展示同一个图标的三个版本。一个是正确的，另两个经过了篡改，我们要求他们选出正确的那张。有40组图标，包括《星球大战》系列中的机器人C-3PO、Fruit of the Loom的品牌标志和棋盘游戏中的大富翁。
在已经被认可并发表于《心理科学》杂志的实验结果中，我们发现参与者在其中七张图标上的表现非常差，选出正确图标的情况只有大约或不到33%。对于这七张图标，参与者认出来的一直都是同一个错误版本，而不是随机选出两个错误版本中的一个。此外，参与者报告说对自己的选择非常有信心，而且尽管选错了，但对这些图标的熟悉度是很高的。
归总来看，这就是网民们多年来所谈论现象的明确证据。视觉上的曼德拉效应是一个真实存在而前后一贯的记忆错误。
In the results, which have been accepted for publication in the journal Psychological Sciences, we found that people fared very poorly on seven of them, only choosing the correct one around or less than 33% of the time. For these seven images, people consistently identified the same incorrect version, not just randomly choosing one of the two incorrect versions. In addition, participants reported being very confident in their choices and having high familiarity with these icons despite being wrong.
Put together, it’s clear evidence of the phenomenon that people on the internet have talked about for years: The visual Mandela Effect is a real and consistent memory error.
为了检视视觉曼德拉效应是否真的存在，我们做了一个实验，在实验中向参与者展示同一个图标的三个版本。一个是正确的，另两个经过了篡改，我们要求他们选出正确的那张。有40组图标，包括《星球大战》系列中的机器人C-3PO、Fruit of the Loom的品牌标志和棋盘游戏中的大富翁。
在已经被认可并发表于《心理科学》杂志的实验结果中，我们发现参与者在其中七张图标上的表现非常差，选出正确图标的情况只有大约或不到33%。对于这七张图标，参与者认出来的一直都是同一个错误版本，而不是随机选出两个错误版本中的一个。此外，参与者报告说对自己的选择非常有信心，而且尽管选错了，但对这些图标的熟悉度是很高的。
归总来看，这就是网民们多年来所谈论现象的明确证据。视觉上的曼德拉效应是一个真实存在而前后一贯的记忆错误。
The correct version of Pikachu is the one on the left. Most participants in the study not only chose a wrong version of the popular cartoon character, but they also chose the same wrong one – the Pikachu with the black tip on its tail.
（图解：皮卡丘的正确版本是左边的那个。该项研究中的大部分参与者不仅选择了这个流行卡通人物的错误版本，而且选出的还是同一个错误版本：有黑色尾巴尖的皮卡丘。
选后三问：
b.你对自己的选择有几分信心？
c.你对皮卡丘有多熟悉？
d.你以前见过皮卡丘几次？）
We found that this false memory effect was incredibly strong, across multiple different ways of testing memory. Even when people saw the correct version of the icon, they still chose the incorrect version just a few minutes later.
And when asked to freely draw the icons from their memory, people also included the same incorrect features.
我们发现，在多种不同的记忆测试方式中，这种虚假记忆效应都极强。就算人们看了正确版本的图标，他们也还是会在仅仅几分钟后的选择中选出错误版本。
而当被要求根据他们的记忆自由地画出这些图标时，人们的画中也包含了同样的错误特征。
And when asked to freely draw the icons from their memory, people also included the same incorrect features.
我们发现，在多种不同的记忆测试方式中，这种虚假记忆效应都极强。就算人们看了正确版本的图标，他们也还是会在仅仅几分钟后的选择中选出错误版本。
而当被要求根据他们的记忆自由地画出这些图标时，人们的画中也包含了同样的错误特征。
No universal cause
不存在天下共通的原因
不存在天下共通的原因
What causes this shared false memory for specific icons?
We found that visual features like color and brightness could not explain the effect. We also tracked participants’ mouse movements as they viewed the images on a computer screen to see if they simply didn’t scan over a particular part, such as Pikachu’s tail. But even when people directly viewed the correct part of the image, they still chose the false version immediately afterward. We also found that for most icons, it was unlikely people had seen the false version beforehand and were just remembering that version, rather than the correct version.
是什么导致了这种对特定图标的共享错误记忆？
我们发现，颜色和亮度等视觉特征无法解释这种效应。我们还跟踪了参与者在电脑屏幕上查看图标时的鼠标动作，以了解他们是否只是没有扫到某个特定部位，比如皮卡丘的尾巴。但是，就算参与者直接查看了图标的正确部分，他们还是会在看完之后立刻选出错误版本。我们还发现，对于大多数图标来说，参与者不太可能事先见过那个错误版本，然后就顺势记住了那个版本（而不是正确版本）。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
We found that visual features like color and brightness could not explain the effect. We also tracked participants’ mouse movements as they viewed the images on a computer screen to see if they simply didn’t scan over a particular part, such as Pikachu’s tail. But even when people directly viewed the correct part of the image, they still chose the false version immediately afterward. We also found that for most icons, it was unlikely people had seen the false version beforehand and were just remembering that version, rather than the correct version.
是什么导致了这种对特定图标的共享错误记忆？
我们发现，颜色和亮度等视觉特征无法解释这种效应。我们还跟踪了参与者在电脑屏幕上查看图标时的鼠标动作，以了解他们是否只是没有扫到某个特定部位，比如皮卡丘的尾巴。但是，就算参与者直接查看了图标的正确部分，他们还是会在看完之后立刻选出错误版本。我们还发现，对于大多数图标来说，参与者不太可能事先见过那个错误版本，然后就顺势记住了那个版本（而不是正确版本）。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
It may be that there is no one universal cause. Different images may elicit the visual Mandela Effect for different reasons. Some could be related to prior expectations for an image, some might be related to prior visual experience with an image and others could have to do with something entirely different than the images themselves. For example, we found that, for the most part, people only see C-3PO’s upper body depicted in media. The falsely remembered gold leg might be a result of them using prior knowledge – bodies are usually only one color – to fill in this gap.
也许并不存在一个天下共通的原因。不同的图标可能会出于不同的原因而在视觉上引发曼德拉效应。有些可能和事先对图标的期待有关，有些可能和事先对某图标的视觉体验有关，还有一些可能和与图标本身完全没有关系的东西有关。比如我们发现，在大多数情况下，人们在媒体中看到的C-3PO只有上半身。错记成金色的腿，可能是他们沿用了之前的知识来填补这一空白的结果，即身体通常只有一种颜色。
也许并不存在一个天下共通的原因。不同的图标可能会出于不同的原因而在视觉上引发曼德拉效应。有些可能和事先对图标的期待有关，有些可能和事先对某图标的视觉体验有关，还有一些可能和与图标本身完全没有关系的东西有关。比如我们发现，在大多数情况下，人们在媒体中看到的C-3PO只有上半身。错记成金色的腿，可能是他们沿用了之前的知识来填补这一空白的结果，即身体通常只有一种颜色。
But the fact that we can demonstrate consistencies in false memories for certain icons suggests that part of what drives false memories is dependent on our environment – and independent of our subjective experiences with the world.
但是，我们可以证明对特定图标的虚假记忆存在一致性，这一事实表明：驱动虚假记忆的部分原因取决于我们所处的环境，而与我们对这个世界的主观体验无关。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
评论翻译
很赞 ( 2 )
收藏
Cry Freedom, a movie about the life and death of Stephen Biko in a South African prison, was released in 1987. I believe people saw the movie and super-imposed Nelson Mandela, a well-known South African activist, over Stephen Biko.
《哭喊自由》（英国）是一部讲述斯蒂芬·毕柯在一座南非监狱中的生活和死亡的电影，于1987年上映。我相信，人们看完这部电影后，就把南非著名活动家纳尔逊·曼德拉的形象叠加在了斯蒂芬·毕柯身上。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
（回）你知道吗，柯克船长在《星际迷航》中从来没有说过“beem me up Scotty（把我传送上来，史考提）”，汉弗莱·鲍嘉在《卡萨布兰卡》（即《北非谍影》）中从来没有说过“play it again Sam（再弹一遍吧，山姆）”。我和数以百万计的人真心相信我们记得听到过这两个角色说出过这些话，但显然他俩都没有说过。
It is possible that subjectivity has a shared or common component. Perhaps this says the same thing, there is an external cause, but when frxd this way, one can ask how this can be. Is it genetic, common experience of the physical world, cultural, etc. Spoken and written language is an example of a shared subjectivity, why not visual language? There are also examples from written language. When writing it is easy to drop and article, and on proof reading, your mind inserts it as you read. Eventually it is noticed, but the fact that mind is adding the missing article seems to be not much different than adding a feature to an image. In art we use this effect all the time. It only becomes a problem when it leads to the exercise of power on a mass scale, because those involved do not doubt what seems obvious to them, or emotions turn of their ability to doubt and be critical.
很可能主观性有一个共通/共有的组成部分。也许这说的是同一件事，存在一个外部原因，但是，当以这种方式架构时，你也许会问这怎么可能。它是基因层面的吗？是对物理世界的共同体验吗？是文化层面的吗？等等。口语和书面语是一个主观性共通的例子，为什么视觉语言就不是呢？在书面语中也有相关的例子。在写作时，很容易漏加冠词，而在校对时，你的头脑会在阅读时将其插入。最终，它还是被注意到了，但事实是，头脑会去添加缺失的冠词，和在图标中添加一个特征似乎也没有什么不同。在艺术中，我们一直在利用这种效应。只有当它导致大规模行使权力时才会成为问题，因为参与其中的那些人不会去怀疑对他们来说显而易见的东西，或者是情绪影响了他们质疑和批判的能力。
When the attention is won, our conscious perception is accomplished. What we perceive visually is a reconstruction of the reality, not the photographic image. Some details are not the center of attention, while the perception is also enriched by far more attributes (e.g., perception of direction of movement, speed, the value and name of the obxt, and many more that is not in the saccade image.
当有什么外物引发了我们的关注时，我们有意识的感知就完成了。我们通过视觉的感知，是对现实的一种重构，而不再是那张照片本身了。一些个细节并不是注意力的核心所在，与此同时，感知也被更多的属性所充实（比如，对运动方向、速度、物体的价值和名称的感知，还有更多感知不在对图片的一扫而过中发生）
举例来说，如果我们的注意力系统识别出了一张脸，则它会聚焦于眼睛，如果识别出了一只手，则会聚焦于它的运动。这些特征都经过了数百万年的进化，以确保我们的生存率达到最高。到那时，我们边缘系统的情感记忆就会启动，产生对这种感知的感觉。这已经成了一刹那间发生的那种“战斗还是逃跑”的生死抉择。
原创翻译：龙腾网 http://www.ltaaa.cn 转载请注明出处
“Morphic resonance is a process whereby self-organising systems inherit a memory from previous similar systems. In its most general formulation, morphic resonance means that the so-called laws of nature are more like habits. The hypothesis of morphic resonance also leads to a radically new interpretation of memory storage in the brain and of biological inheritance. Memory need not be stored in material traces inside brains, which are more like TV receivers than video recorders, tuning into influences from the past. And biological inheritance need not all be coded in the genes; much of it depends on morphic resonance from previous members of the species. Thus each individual inherits a collective memory from past members of the species, and also contributes to the collective memory, affecting other members of the species in the future.”
“形态共振是自组织系统由以继承先前类似系统的记忆的一个过程。在其最通行的表述中，形态共振意味着所谓的自然规律更像是习惯。形态共振的假说也导致了对大脑中的记忆储存和生理遗传的全新解释。记忆不需要储存在大脑内部的物质痕迹中，大脑更像是电视接收器而不是录像机，可以调频到过去给你带来的那些影响。而生理遗传也不需要全部在基因中编码；其大部分取决于该物种以前的成员间的形态共鸣。因此，每个个体都从该物种以前的成员那里继承了集体记忆，同时也为集体记忆做出了自己的贡献，这个过程也影响到了该物种未来的其他成员。”
形态共振研究中的一个例子是训练啮齿动物（老鼠）去走迷宫。他们发现，一旦一部分老鼠学会了走通迷宫，则他们事后用同一个迷宫测试紧随其后的其他所有鼠群时，它们走通的速度似乎都变快了，就好像它们集体“分享”了相关走向。
all memories are false.
所有的记忆都是虚假的。
all memories are constructed. no memories are real. they are fragile and they change with time and opportunity. some memories seem to be retained for decades, will others evaporate in a moment.
the once common classroom demonstration of an intruder bursting into the room and then of asking students to recount the event, demonstrates both the inability of people to observe but also to remember and recall, even after just a few minutes.
在经历了数十亿张图像以及手术和尸体解剖之后，没有人真的知道头脑是如何运作的。也没有人真的知道记忆是如何形成的，想法是如何产生的。
所有的记忆都是建构出来的，没有任何记忆是真实的。它们是脆弱的，也会随着时间和机会而改变。有些记忆似乎可以留存几十年，而另一些则在一瞬间就消失不见了。
在课堂上有一种曾经很常见的证明法：一个不速之客突然闯入房间，之后要求学生详述这一事件，最后证明了人们既没有观察的能力，也没有记住和回忆的能力，即使是在短短几分钟后。
we seem, some of us anyway, to manage words and numbers more accurately than images in general. images are far more complex than the arrangement of letters and numbers, and even an otherwise simple cartoon character is actually complex.
然而，人们被定罪（有时是处决）是基于证人的长期记忆和陪审员们的短期记忆。
貌似我们中的一些人，相比于一般的图标，在处理言语和数字时就是会更准确。图标远比字母和数字的排列复杂，甚至一个简单的卡通人物实际上也很复杂。
（回）我们的大脑准确记录每一个细节的能力是很有限的，因此它们会根据过去的经验来进行猜测，以填补各种空白。目击者可是出了名的不可靠，倒不是因为他们在撒谎，而是因为他们是真的在用自己期望看到的东西填补了那些空白。
（回）我接受你的大前提，但这种现象背后存在一个不同的原因，我很想知道你对我这种思维路径有何看法。
与事实不符的记忆并不是“假的”，因为它们的目的不是为了准确地回忆过去的事件。相反，记忆在很大程度上是对一个复杂世界的情感指引。举个常见的例子，如果在作出逃离一只可能存在的狮子的决定之前，每次都去回想稀树草原上的一片灌木丛开始窸窣作响，那最终就意味着死亡。相反，我们针对这种情况形成了一种瞬间的、情绪化的反应，会根据被这类遭遇所唤起的情感，逃离潜在的危险源。
And this also explains why numbers and specific words are less likely to be garbled in our minds. They do not represent danger, in and of themselves, so there is no need to add emotional context, a context that then distorts details.
从图存的角度来看，当一位不速之客闯进教室，重要的不是他穿着什么牌子的卡其裤，而是这个事件发生了本身。而且，这个事件所象征的危险是极大的，也是要去规避的。归根结底，这是我们记忆背后的驱动力。
而这也解释了为什么数字和特定的言语在我们的脑海中不太可能被篡改。它们本身并不代表危险，所以完全没有必要添加情境，而这种情境会在之后扭曲细节。
总之，这就是我的阅读过程引导我想到的东西。