ProZ.com translation contests »
Benevolent deception: "The placebo button effect" » English to Slovenian » Entry by Jasa Pipan


Source text in English

Translation by Jasa Pipan (#25636)

Over the course of many years, without making any great fuss about it, the authorities in New York disabled most of the control buttons that once operated pedestrian-crossing lights in the city. Computerised timers, they had decided, almost always worked better. By 2004, fewer than 750 of 3,250 such buttons remained functional. The city government did not, however, take the disabled buttons away—beckoning countless fingers to futile pressing.

Initially, the buttons survived because of the cost of removing them. But it turned out that even inoperative buttons serve a purpose. Pedestrians who press a button are less likely to cross before the green man appears, says Tal Oron-Gilad of Ben-Gurion University of the Negev, in Israel. Having studied behaviour at crossings, she notes that people more readily obey a system which purports to heed their input.

Inoperative buttons produce placebo effects of this sort because people like an impression of control over systems they are using, says Eytan Adar, an expert on human-computer interaction at the University of Michigan, Ann Arbor. Dr Adar notes that his students commonly design software with a clickable “save” button that has no role other than to reassure those users who are unaware that their keystrokes are saved automatically anyway. Think of it, he says, as a touch of benevolent deception to counter the inherent coldness of the machine world.

That is one view. But, at road crossings at least, placebo buttons may also have a darker side. Ralf Risser, head of FACTUM, a Viennese institute that studies psychological factors in traffic systems, reckons that pedestrians’ awareness of their existence, and consequent resentment at the deception, now outweighs the benefits.
Oblasti v New Yorku so, ne da bi to prav posebej obešale na veliki zvon, v teku let postopoma onemogočile večino gumbov, ki so upravljali s semaforji mestnih prehodov za pešce. Sklenile so namreč, da računalniško podprti odštevalniki časa skoraj brez izjeme delujejo bolje. V letu 2004 je svoje delo še naprej opravljalo manj kot 750 od 3.250 takšnih gumbov. Ker pa mestne oblasti nedelujočih gumbov niso odstranile, je nanje še naprej brezplodno pritiskalo na stotine prstov.

Prvotno so gumbe ohranili zato, ker je bilo njihovo odstranjevanje predrago. Izkazalo pa se je, da tudi nedelujoči gumbi služijo določenemu namenu. Tal Oron-Gilad z izraelske univerze Ben-Gurion of the Negev pravi, da bodo pešci, ki pritisnejo na gumb, s prečkanjem prehoda namreč najverjetneje počakali, dokler se na semaforju ne pojavi zeleni možic. Pri svojem preučevanju obnašanja na prehodih za pešce je opazila, da smo ljudje bolj pripravljeni ubogati sistem, za katerega se zdi, da upošteva naš prispevek.

Po mnenju Eytana Adarja, strokovnjaka za interakcijo med človekom in računalnikom z michiganske univerze Ann Arbor, imajo nedelujoči gumbi takšen placebo učinek zato, ker je ljudem všeč občutek, da nadzorujejo sisteme, ki jih uporabljajo. Dr. Adar pravi, da njegovi študentje pri načrtovanju programske opreme pogosto dodajo gumb za »shranjevanje«, ki ga je moč klikniti in ki je namenjen le temu, da uporabnike, ki ne vedo, da se njihovi pritiski na tipke shranijo samodejno, navda z notranjim mirom. Po besedah dr. Adarja gre za dobrohotno prevaro, namenjeno spopadanju s prirojeno brezčutnostjo sveta strojev.

To je ena plat medalje. Toda vsaj na prehodih za pešce morda obstaja tudi temnejša stran placebo-gumbov. Ralf Risser, vodja dunajskega inštituta FACTUM, kjer proučujejo psihološke dejavnike v prometnih sistemih, namreč pravi, da se pešci zavedajo obstoja takšnih gumbov, zaradi česar se počutijo prevarane, njihova posledična zamera pa pretehta nad koristmi.


Discuss this entry