如何从现实中分离出学习神话？【英译汉】

How to separate learning myths from reality | McKinsey & Company

Over the years, you have probably gained some insight into how your brain works. You may have taken a course or read a book that promised to reveal the secret of maximizing your mental capacity—a common sales pitch of leadership coaches these days. In the process, you may have read that after a critical period in childhood there is no hope for significant learning, that half of your brain is inactive at any given time, or that you’re capable of learning properly only in your preferred style.

【注：原文为英文，摘自麦肯锡公司网站注明的麦肯锡季刊。我本打算用谷歌翻译来帮自己省点儿功夫，毕竟读英文不如读中文方便，可是谷歌翻译让我很失望，把have advanced scientifice knowledge硬是翻译成了“拥有高级科学知识”（见下文）！狂汗！想了一下，为了自己阅读方面，我还是大意翻译一下吧，不求专业，更不求信达雅，还请原文作者和读者们理解。】

【参考译文：

这么多年来，你很可能已经获得了关于你的大脑如何运作的某些洞察。你或许参加过某门课程或读过某本书，其中会承诺向你揭示最大化你的心智能力的秘密——这听起来像是近来领导力教练们的常用销售调门。在这个过程中，你或许知道了以下信息：在度过了童年期的一个关键时期后你就没有显著提升学习能力的希望了；无论何时，你的一半大脑都处在非活跃状态；你只有用最适合自己的方式才能恰当地学习。】

Each of these claims is what we call a “neuromyth,” a misconception based on incorrect interpretations of neuroscientific research. Our experience advising companies on their lifelong-learning initiatives suggests that such misunderstandings remain embedded in many corporate training programs. As companies increasingly pour money into developing their employees, they can no longer afford to invest in training programs based on inaccurate and out-of-date assumptions. In recent years, for example, US businesses alone spent more than $164 billion annually on employee learning.¹ The stakes are high and getting higher.

【参考译文：

上述的这每一条声明我们都称之为”神经神话“，都是基于对神经科学研究的不正确解读所产生的错误认知。我们给多家公司提供终生学习举措建议的经验表明，上述这些误解仍植根于许多公司培训项目中。由于大量公司正不断加大人员开发的投入，因此它们无法承受把钱投到基于不准确和过时假设而开发出来的培训项目中。比如在近几年，单单美国商界就在员工学习上花费了平均每年1640亿美元。这其中巨大的利害关系正变得越来越大。】

Bridging the gap between popular neuromyths and the scientific insights gathered in the past few decades is a growing challenge. As modern brain-imaging techniques, such as functional magnetic resonance imaging (fMRI), have advanced scientific knowledge, these misleading lay interpretations by business practitioners have advanced as well. Unless such misconceptions are eliminated, they will continue to undermine both personal- and organizational-learning efforts. In this article, we’ll address the three most prominent neuromyths in light of the latest research and explore some of the implications for corporate learning.

【参考译文：

因此，我们现在面临着一个不断增加的挑战：如何缩短流行的神经神话与过去几十年中通过研究获得的科学洞见之间的差距呢？随着功能性磁共振成像技术（fMRI）等现代脑成像技术推动了科学知识的进展，由商业实践者们的这些误读所导致的误导效果也在不断增强。除非清除这些错误认知，否则它们会继续破坏我们的个人和组织学习努力。我们在本文中将根据最近的研究成果来探讨三个最为显著的神经神话，并对公司学习提出一些启发。】

Myth #1: The critical window of childhood

Most of us have heard about critical learning periods—the first years of life, when the vast majority of the brain’s development is thought to occur. After this period, or so the assumption too often goes, the trajectory of human development is deemed to be more or less fixed. That, however, is an exaggeration. Recent neuroscientific research indicates that experience can change both the brain’s physical structure and its functional organization—a phenomenon described as neuroplasticity.【参考译文：

神话一：童年的关键时间窗

我们大多数人都听过关键学习时期——也就是我们出生后几年内绝大部分大脑发育的时期。根据这一假设，过了这个关键学习时期我们的发展轨迹就或多或少被认为确定不变了。但是，这个说法夸张了。最近的神经科学研究表明，经历可以改变大脑的物理结构和功能组织——这一现象被描述为神经可塑性。】

Researchers studying the plasticity of the brain are increasingly interested in mindfulness. Practicing simple meditation techniques, such as concentrated breathing, helps build denser gray matter in parts of the brain associated with learning and memory, controlling emotions, and compassion. A team led by Harvard scientists has shown that just eight weeks of mindful meditation can produce structural brain changes significant enough to be picked up by MRI scanners.²

【参考译文：

研究大脑可塑性的人员对于一心专注（或全神贯注）越来越感兴趣。当我们运用专注呼吸等简单的冥想技巧，就可以有助于我们头脑中与学习和记忆、情绪调控和情感有关的部分的灰质变厚。哈佛科学家们带领的一个研究团队的研究表明，只需要八周的专注冥想就能够产生磁共振成像扫描仪能足以检测到的大脑结构性改变。】

Organizations from General Mills in consumer foods to digital bellwethers such as Facebook and Google increasingly give their employees opportunities to benefit from mindfulness and meditation. Most such programs have garnered enthusiastic support from employees, who often see a marked improvement in their mind-sets and job performance. For example, employees at the health insurer Aetna who have participated in the company’s free yoga and meditation classes report, on average, a 28 percent decrease in their levels of stress and a productivity increase of 62 minutes a week—an added value of approximately $3,000 per employee a year. CEO Mark Bertolini, who started the program a few years ago, marvels at the level of interest generated across the company; to date, more than a quarter of Aetna’s 50,000 employees have taken at least one class.³ Leaders like Bertolini understand that providing them with the tools to become more focused and mindful can foster a better working environment conducive to development and high performance.

【参考译文：

从消费食品行业的通用磨坊公司（General Mills）到脸谱和谷歌等数字时代领头羊公司在内的很多公司正越来越多地为自己的员工提供机会以从专心和冥想中获益。由于员工们经常能够看到自己在心智模式和工作绩效方面的显著提升，故而大部分的这一类项目受到他们欢迎。例如，健康保险服务商Aetna的员工们就报告了在他们参加了公司的免费瑜伽和冥想课程后，压力水平平均减少了28%，同时每周生产力增加了62分钟——一年下来就是大约3000美元的增加价值。作为几年前的项目发起人，公司CEO Mark Bertolini对这一项目在全公司员工中所引发的兴趣水平感到不可思议；到目前为止，他们公司50000名员工中超过1/4都至少参加了一期课程。像Bertolini这样的领导者们明白，为员工提供能使其更专注、更用心的工具能够培育出更有利于发展和高绩效的更好的工作环境。】

Myth #2: The idle-brain theory

A recent European survey discovered that nearly 50 percent of teachers surveyed in the United Kingdom and the Netherlands believed that the idle-brain theory has been proved scientifically.⁴ This misunderstanding originally stemmed from inaccurate interpretations of activation hot spots in brain-imaging studies. By now, more carefully interpreted functional brain scans have shown that, irrespective of what a person is doing, the entire brain is generally active and that, depending on the task, some areas are more active than others. People can always learn new ideas and new skills, not by tapping into some unused part of the brain, but by forming new or stronger connections between nerve cells.

【参考译文：

神话二：大脑空转理论

近期在欧洲开展的一项调查发现，被调查的英国和荷兰教师中有将近50%的人相信大脑空转理论是被科学证明了的。这一误读根源于脑成像研究中对于活跃热点的不准确解读。现在，通过更加认真地解读大脑功能性扫描结果，人们发现不管一个人在做什么，他/她的整个大脑都处于活跃状态，且任务不同大脑的一些区域比其它区域更为活跃。人们总能通过形成新的或更强壮的大脑神经元之间的连接而非通过向某些未经使用的大脑部位灌输来学习新观念和新技能。】

This insight into the brain’s capacity becomes particularly relevant for the environment and context in which learning typically occurs. Everybody knows, all too well, about the habit of quickly checking e-mails or planning for the next meeting in the middle of a training session. The problem is that such multitasking engages large parts of the brain’s working memory. Without freeing that up, we cannot successfully memorize and learn new information. In short, multitasking and learning cannot occur effectively at the same time.

【参考译文：

关于脑容量的这一发现与学习发生的典型环境和背景尤其相关联。我们每个人都知道（而且非常清楚地知道）我们在参加一个培训项目学习过程中会有习惯去迅速检查电子邮件或规划下一次会议。问题是这样的多任务活动涉及到我们大部分的大脑工作记忆部分。如果不是释放出一部分大脑记忆，我们就无法成功地记住和学习新的信息。简而言之，多任务活动和学习不能在同一时间内有效发生。】

Some organizations, recognizing this problem, are working to build immersive learning environments where distractions are eliminated. At McKinsey, we’ve created a model factory that participants can walk through to see operating conditions in action. But first, everyone is asked to place their phones and other distractive belongings in a locker, so they can fully concentrate on the learning exercise at hand. At many companies, removing the temptation of using mobile devices during learning sessions is becoming commonplace.

【参考译文：

有些组织认识到了这个问题，正在尝试构建沉浸式学习环境以减少干扰。在麦肯锡公司，我们已经制造出了一个模范工厂，可供参与者四处参观工厂的环境条件。不过首先每个人被要求将手机和其它会造成干扰的随身物品放到储物柜里，这样他们就能够完全专注在进行的学习训练上来。在许多公司里，员工学习期间去除他们使用移动设备的诱惑正逐渐变得越来越常见。】

Myth #3: Learning styles and the left/right brain hypothesis

Almost everyone has encountered the theory that most people are either dominantly analytical (and left brained) or more creative (and right brained). However, this either/or dichotomy is false. The two hemispheres of the brain are linked and communicate extensively together; they do not work in isolation. The simplistic notion of a false binary has led, in many businesses, to the misconception that each one of us has a strictly preferred learning style and channel. Recent studies have flatly disproved this idea, suggesting instead that engaging all the senses in a variety of ways (for instance, audiovisual and tactile) can help employees retain new content.

【参考译文：

神话三：学习方式和左/右脑假说

我们几乎每个人都见到过说我们大部分人要么是分析型（左脑型）为主要么是创造型（右脑型）为主的说法。然而，这种一分为二地看法是错误的。我们大脑的两半球是连接在一起且相互之间广泛沟通的；它们并非独立工作。在许多企业中，这种视大脑为二元运作模式的错误的简化概念导致了人们误以为我们每个人都有一个严格的学习方式和学习渠道偏好。最近的研究直截了当地否定了这一看法，反倒表明通过借助多种方式（比如视觉、听觉和触觉）能够帮助员工记住新内容。】

One organization that puts this idea into practice is KFC, which uses multiple forms of learning in customer-service training. Sessions begin with an after-hours board game placing the entire team of a store in the role of the customer. This is followed up by “gamified” learning that fits into roughly 15-minute windows during shifts. These video game–like modules put the employees behind the cash register to handle a number of typical customer experiences, including responding to audio and visual cues of satisfaction. At the end of the online modules, employees physically reconvene at the front of the store to hear feedback, report on what they’ve learned, and receive live coaching as reinforcement.

【参考译文：

肯德基是将这一理念落到实处的一个组织，它在客户服务培训方面利用了多种学习形式。在项目一开始，店里所有团队成员都要在打烊后玩一个扮演顾客角色的游戏，第二阶段学习是在每一次换班间隙进行的“游戏化”学习活动。在这些类似于视频游戏的模块中，员工被置于收款机后面来处理一些典型的客户服务问题，包括回应客户的与满意度有关的声音或视频的尾白。在每个在线学习模块结束时，员工本人在店前重新集合以听取反馈、汇报所学并接受强化辅导。】

Although significant progress has been made, much remains to be done to eradicate neuromyths from the philosophy of corporate-training programs. Neuroscience research has confirmed some of the approaches that learning professionals already use, such as on-the-job reinforcement and engagement without distractions. But that research has also contradicted other approaches. Companies should draw on the newly substantiated insights and may need to rethink their training programs accordingly. At the very least, they need to improve their dialogue with, and understanding of, the scientific community.

【参考译文：

尽管人们在从公司培训项目领域中消除神经神话方面已经取得了显著进展，但依然还有很多工作要做。神经科学的研究尽管已经确认了学习专家已经在用的一些方法，比如在职强化和无干扰学习的有效性，但这些研究也反驳了另外一些方法。公司应该吸取已经证实了的最新发现，并且需要相应地重新思考公司的培训项目，最起码的，他们需要增加与科学界的对话并增强对于科学界的理解。】

About the authors

Artin Atabaki is a consultant in McKinsey’s Stuttgart office; Stacey Dietsch is an associate principal in the Washington, DC, office; and Julia M. Sperling is a principal in the Dubai office.

The authors wish to thank McKinsey’s Jennifer May, Michael Rennie, and Kristina Wollschlaeger for their support of and contributions to this article.