论文部分内容阅读
美国密执安大学的心理学家梅尔教授,曾拿这样一个问题在学生中做试验:某人用60元买了一匹马,以70元卖出;他又以80元将马买回,再以90元出手。问他赔赚如何?答案从“不赔不赚”到“30元”,竟有4种,正确者(赚20元)只占40％。这个有趣的试验表明一个道理,即人们在解决问题的过程中,往往会由于外部刺激等方面的原因,造成“心理眩惑”,从而导致错误。这种心理眩惑,有时会出现在编辑删改稿件的过程中,其结果是改成的稿子不够通顺,甚至不可理解。当编者读过一篇来稿,觉得可用,但嫌其篇幅过长或不够简练时,便手执红笔,一边重读,一边“笔削”。这时被划掉的句子中,有的可能是为了保持全文贯通所必需的。当他删后重读时,删掉的文字仍为扫视所及,往往会一时发现不了留下的缺口。这可以用电影原理中的“视觉残留”去比喻。脑中留下的印象,可以使静止影像连贯为活动电影。同样,编辑删后重读时,前两遍阅读已在脑中残留的印象,足以填补删节造成的缺口。当然,文章的思路远较视觉形象复
Professor Mell, a psychologist at the University of Michigan in the United States, tested the students with such a question: Someone bought a horse for 60 yuan and sold it for 70 yuan. He bought the horse again for 80 yuan , Then 90 yuan shot. Ask him how to make a profit? The answer from “do not lose no gain” to “30 yuan”, as many as 4, the correct person (earning 20 yuan) only 40%. This interesting experiment shows the truth that in the process of solving problems, people often cause “psychological confusion” due to external stimuli and other reasons, which leads to errors. This kind of psychological confusion sometimes appears in the process of editing and deleting manuscripts. As a result, the manuscripts that have been changed into are not smooth enough or even incomprehensible. When an editor has read a manuscript and feels that it is available, he is not allowed to read it. Some of the sentences that are crossed out at this time may be necessary to keep the full text alive. When he deleted and re-read the deleted text is still glimpse, often can not find a moment to leave the gap. This can be compared to the “visual residue” in the movie’s principle. Impressions left in the brain can make still images coherent as motion pictures. Similarly, when editing and deleting after reading, the first two readings have been left in the brain impressed enough to fill the gap caused by the abolition. Of course, the article’s thinking is far more complex than the visual image