國家地理:用吐槽的方式談科學效果更好(3)

It's not hard to see why the relationship between satire and science would be symbiotic. Late-night hosts may occasionally poke fun at scientists, portraying them as oddballs working on obscure projects. Much more often, however, the hosts promote a positive image of science. Take Colbert, whose NASA-themed humor led the space agency to name a zero-gravity treadmill after him; or Kimmel, whose show features science demonstrations with exploding pumpkins and flying Ping-Pong balls. By making science entertaining to audience members with little knowledge of the topic, late-night television could be a gateway to science engagement. But if these viewers do tune in to science topics, will their opinions change?

不難看出諷刺與科學之間共生關系的原因。深夜主持人有時會嘲笑科學家，將他們描繪成從事晦澀項目的怪人。不過主持人常常會更多地宣傳科學的正面形象。以科爾伯特為例，他以美國航空航天局（NASA）為主題的幽默，使NASA以他的名字命名了零重力跑步機。再如坎摩爾秀以爆炸的南瓜和飛行的乒乓球的科學演示為特色，讓科學知識變得有趣。通過讓對科學知之甚少的觀眾感到有趣，深夜電視秀可以成為一條了解科學的途徑。但是如果這些觀眾收看科學話題，他們的觀念會改變嗎？

Our first experiment in 2013 tested how watching a clip from The Daily Show or The Colbert Report influenced audience members' beliefs about climate change. Viewers who saw Jon Stewart say that global warming is real came away more certain that climate change is happening. Colbert's show had a similar effect, even though some viewers misinterpreted his deadpan humor and mistook the host for a real climate change doubter.

我們在2013年進行的第一個實驗，測試了觀看《每日秀》或《扣扣熊報告》中的片段如何影響觀眾對氣候變化的看法。當觀眾聽到喬恩·斯圖爾特說全球變暖是真實的，他們更加確定氣候變化正在發(fā)生?？茽柌氐墓?jié)目也對觀眾產生類似的效果，雖然某些觀眾誤解了科爾伯特的冷幽默，認為他是真正的氣候變化懷疑論者。