The Psychology of Your Scrolling Addiction刷屏上瘾心理学

Picture this： You’ve just settled into your workday and pulled up that big report you need to finish， when a friend sends you a couple of celebrity videos on Instagram. You figure you’ll just take a few minutes to watch the videos—and then the next thing you know， an hour has gone by. You’ve been sucked down the rabbit hole1， watching video after video， while that big report sits， neglected， on2 your desk.

想象一下：你刚开始投入到工作日的状态，准备处理那份重要的报告，这时朋友在Instagram上发来了几段名人视频。你本以为只会花几分钟浏览，结果不知不觉一个小时过去了。你已深陷其中无法自拔，一条接一条地刷着视频，而那份重要的报告却被你摘置在桌上。

We all want to use our time efficiently and productively， especially while at work. And yet， studies have shown that 77% of employees use social media while on the clock3， many of them for up to several hours a day. Even when we don’t have a looming assignment， we almost never sit down， turn on our phones， and intentionally decide， “I’m going to spend two hours on TikTok now！” So how does “I’ll just watch a few celebrity confessionals4” spiral5 into hours of viewing？

我们都希望高效利用时间，尤其是工作的时候。然而，研究显示，77%的员工在上班期间刷社交媒体，其中许多人每天在上面耗费数个小时。即使没有迫在眉睫的任务，我们也几乎从不会坐下来，打开手机，刻意决定“我现在要花两个小时刷TikTok”！那么，“我只是刷几条名人自白视频”是如何蜕变成花费几个小时刷视频的呢？

To better understand why people fall into these sorts of rabbit holes （and how they can climb out and get back to work）， we conducted a series of studies with a total of 6，445 U.S.-based students and working adults. Through this research， we identified three factors that influence whether people choose to continue viewing photos and videos rather than switch to another activity： the amount of media the person has already viewed， the similarity of the media they’ve viewed， and the manner in which they viewed the media.

为了进一步理解人们为何会陷入这种兔子洞（以及如何从中脱困并重回工作状态），我们进行了一系列研究，共涉及美国境内6445名学生和上班族。这项研究确定了三种因素影响人们是选择继续浏览照片和视频，还是切换到其他活动：所浏览媒体的数量、相似性，以及浏览的方式。

In the first part of our research， we were interested in exploring whether the pull of the rabbit hole would grow stronger or weaker once people had already viewed several videos. We had participants view either five different music videos or just one music video， and then we asked them if they’d rather watch another video or complete a work-related task. In theory， one might expect that people would get tired of watching music videos after watching five in a row， reducing their desire to watch more of them. But in fact， we found that the opposite was true： Watching five videos made people 10% more likely to choose to watch an additional music video than if they only watched one video.

本研究的第一部分旨在探究人们在观看多个视频后，兔子洞的吸引力会有所增强还是减弱。一些参与者浏览了五条不同的音乐视频，而其他人只看了一条。之后我们询问他们愿意继续刷下一条视频，还是投入到与工作相关的任务中去。理论上，人们可能会认为连续刷五条音乐视频会让人感到厌倦，从而减少观看更多音乐视频的欲望。但实际情况却与之相反：观看五条视频的人比只看过一条的人更有可能继续刷音乐视频，可能性高出10%。

Next， we examined the impact of framing the videos people watched as similar to one another. We showed participants the same two videos， but for half of the participants， we explicitly labelled the videos with the same category label （“educational videos”）， while for the other half of the participants， we didn’t include a category label. We found that simply framing the videos as more similar via the category label made people 21% more likely to choose to watch another related video.

我们接着研究了把所看视频定性为相似类型对观众的影响。所有参与者都观看了相同的两段视频，其中一半人观看的视频加有明确的同类别标签（如“教育视频”），另一半人的视频则没有添加任何分类标签。结果显示，仅通过类别标签暗示视频之间有相似性，观众选择继续观看相关视频的可能性增加了21%。

Finally， we looked at how people acted after watching several videos consecutively， versus when they watched the same number of videos with some interruptions. We had one group of participants complete two work tasks and then watch two similar videos， while the other group completed the same four tasks， but alternated between them （i.e.， work， video， work， video）. Despite having done exactly the same activities， the order made a big difference： The participants whose video consumption was uninterrupted were 22% more likely to choose to watch another video than those who alternated between work tasks and videos.

最后，我们比较了观众连续观看多段视频和断续观看相同数量的视频后的行为差异。一组参与者先完成两项工作，然后观看两段相似的视频，而另一组则交替完成同样的四项任务（即工作、视频、工作、视频）。尽管两组进行的活动完全相同，但不同的顺序却产生了显著的影响：观看视频无间断的参与者比在工作和视频之间交替的参与者更有可能选择观看下一个视频，可能性高出了22%。

Clearly， seemingly small details around the order and types of content we consume can have a major impact on our decision to keep consuming similar content. But what drives this effect？ Prior research suggests that the three factors we identified all increase the accessibility of similar media. In this context， accessibility refers to how familiar， or top-of-mind6， a given kind of content feels. When something feels more accessible， it becomes easier to process， leading us to anticipate that we will enjoy it more. In other words， people choose to continue down the rabbit hole because viewing related media “feels right” —even if it’s at odds with7 what they actually want to be doing， whether that’s getting work done or even just taking a break.

显然，浏览顺序和内容类型等细微差别都会对我们是否继续浏览类似内容产生重要影响。不过，这种影响是如何产生的呢？以往的研究表明，我们所确定的三种因素都会增加类似媒体的可及性。在这种情况下，可及性指的是某种内容给人的熟悉感或者在我们心中的优先程度。当某样东西感觉更加可及时，我们处理起来会更得心应手，这让我们下意识地认为自己会更喜欢它。换句话说，人们选择继续沉迷于兔子洞，是因为浏览相关媒体“感觉对头”——即使这与他们实际想做的事情相悖，无论是完成工作还是只是小憩片刻。