中文表达者的“沟通模式偏爱悖论”与“下情上达评价悖论”

Communication Mode Preference Paradox and Its Derivate:Communication Performance Assessment Paradox

文字概率表征是指用"可能"、"也许"、"不一定"等词汇或短语来表示事件发生的可能程度。研究者发现,英语表达者在接受信息时偏爱数字概率表征,在传递信息时反而偏爱文字概率表征,这种现象被称之为"沟通模式偏爱悖论"(Communication Mode Preference Paradox,CMPP)。本研究调查了说中文的大学生(N=356)和管理者(N=108)在"一般情境"和"天气预报情境"下的概率沟通偏好;并对"下情上达"情境下的四类管理者(两类"传声筒型"管理者:听取下级的文字概率信息并向上级汇报文字概率信息;听取下级的数字概率信息并向上级汇报数字概率信息。以及两类"信息转化型"管理者:听取下级的文字概率信息却向上级汇报数字概率信息;听取下级的数字概率信息却向上级汇报文字概率信息)作了评判。其结果发现:(1)在"一般情境"和"天气预报情境"下,说中文的被调查者不仅也普遍存在CMPP现象,而且发生该现象的比例显著地高于说英语的被调查者;(2)另一类沟通悖论:同样面对忠实的"传声筒型"管理者,被调查者认同数字概率"传声筒"、而不认同文字概率"传声筒";同样面对权变的"信息转化型"管理者,被调查者认同将数字转化成文字概率的管理者、而不认同将文字转化成数字概率的管理者;(3)这两类悖论既产生于管理学院的大学生之中也产生于中层管理者之中。我们将新发现的这种沟通悖论称之为"下情上达评价悖论"(Communication Performance Assessment Paradox,CPAP),并对发现这两种悖论的理论和实际意义作了讨论。

The ＇communication mode preference（CMP） paradox＇ says that people prefer to receive precise,i.e.numerical,information involving probabilities of chance events,but they prefer to express them in,vaguer,verbal terms.This research investigate native Chinese speakers＇ communication mode preference in a general context and in a weather forecasting context and,evaluate the performance of four types of managers（two types of ＇loud hailer＇： to get information from a subordinate verbally and to give information to a supervisor verbally;to get information from a subordinate numerically and to give information to a supervisor numerically,and two types of＇information interpreter＇： to get information from a subordinate in quantitative form,but to give information to a supervisor in verbal form;to get information from a subordinate in verbal form,but to give information to a supervisor in quantitative form）.Our findings reveal that,（1） the CMP paradox detected in English-speaking cultures is robust enough to survive in Chinese-speaking culture where non-probabilistic thinking is presumably overwhelming and,most importantly,the CMP paradox is much more likely to be betrayed by Chinese speakers than by English speakers;（2） for exactly the same＇loud hailer＇ managers,those who parrot another numerically are evaluated as acceptable while those who parrot another verbally are assessed as unacceptable;for exactly the same ＇information interpreter＇ managers,those who translate numbers into words are evaluated as acceptable whereas those who translate words into numbers are assessed as unacceptable,which we dub the ＇communication performance assessment（CPA） paradox＇;（3） these two closely related communication paradoxes are commonly betrayed by management students as well as by middle-level managers.The theoretical and practical implications of exploring these paradoxes are discussed.