多看恐怖片,有利于个人成长与发展?|科学60秒

为何我们对恐怖元素欲罢不能

图片

你喜欢半夜看恐怖片吗?虽然惊悚电影会给人留下一些奇怪的“心理阴影”,甚至让你不敢睡觉,但不得不说,那种屏息凝神等待角落里会突然钻出什么怪物的感觉,实在是有种怪异的“爽感”。即使你本人并非恐怖迷,也不得不承认,人类似乎真的都很喜欢被吓到的感觉,甚至有些人明明很胆小,却还是很爱玩恐怖主题的密室逃脱。但,你有没有想过,究竟是什么让这该死的恐惧如此“甜美”?
 
丹麦奥胡斯大学(Aarhus University)娱乐恐惧实验室(Recreational Fear Lab)的行为科学家科尔坦·斯克里夫纳(Coltan Scrivner)表示,人们有时会出于娱乐目的去观看刺激的暴力场景,但在此之外的所有情况下,暴力都被视为不道德的、被全社会抵制的,而且应该受到惩罚。纵观历史与不同文化,确实存在一些特定情境,其中暴力事件不仅被接受,有时甚至会受到赞颂。这听上去很矛盾,但随着时间推移,这种现象蔓延至对恐怖场景的迷恋:人们会为了娱乐而故意吓自己,斯克里夫纳不禁开始思考这种“病态好奇心”背后的原因。

什么是病态好奇心?大多数人并不喜欢那种被恶心到的感觉,但如果你的朋友告诉你:“天啊,这个好恶心,你一定要看看。”很多人还是会去看,虽然依旧会觉得恶心。这种人人都爱玩的“恶趣味”就属于病态好奇心的范畴。

斯克里夫纳的研究曾发现,有些人喜欢跳伞或过山车等刺激活动,喜欢肾上腺素飙升的感觉,但也有很多人在以受惊吓为乐时,享受的可能不一定是恐惧本身。比如很多恐怖片爱好者,他们实际上追求的是一种克服恐惧后的自信感。

人类是唯一一种热衷于故意寻求惊吓的动物吗?科学家们现在还分辨不出动物们是否喜欢某些事物,子非鱼焉知鱼之乐,解读动物行为的意图总是很困难。不过可以确定的是,我们不是唯一一种会在不必要的情况下将自己置于险境,或围观恐怖景象的动物。

比如,如果你曾去过东非坦桑尼亚的塞伦盖蒂国家公园(Serengeti National Park),可能会看到一些汤氏瞪羚(Gazella thomsoni)正在四处吃草,它们身后,一只猎豹的身影若隐若现,这是它们的天敌之一。如果你是瞪羚,看到猎豹的第一件事应该是拔腿就跑,但有些正值青少年的亚成年瞪羚会暂停进食,壮着胆子观察猎豹。它们年轻、健康、敏捷,羚生中和天敌交手的频率还不算很频繁,不过,凭借优秀的身体素质,它们大概率会在和猎豹的生死竞赛中活下来。
 
这种行为就可以被认为是它们是在试图了解自己的天敌。和大多数猫科动物的习性一样,猎豹一天24小时里有23小时都在懒洋洋地消磨时间,在此期间,它们不会开展真正的捕猎、进食等进攻活动。因此,对瞪羚而言,每次看到捕食者都逃跑是相当低效的。相反,它们会通过观察来收集有关潜在威胁的信息,包括捕食者的状态等。

在和人亲缘关系更近的灵长类动物中,同样存在病态的好奇心。演化生物学家查尔斯·达尔文(Charles Darwin)在很久之前就提及过这种现象,一个人在动物园里将一个装着活蛇的袋子放在地上,对大多数灵长类动物而言,这显然是一种唯恐避之不及的威胁。结果则是,灵长类动物会一个个靠近,偷看袋子里的蛇,接着尖叫、四处奔跑。与此同时,其他灵长类动物不会因为同伴的反应而选择远离这只盒子,反而会跑过来重复刚才的行为。就有点像:“这里有个可怕的东西,你得来看看。”

虽然人类无法确定它们是否乐在其中,但这显然是一种故意的行为,有悖于野生动物时刻保持警惕并远离威胁的行为准则。先看蛇的动物明知会吓到同伴,还是“故意”做出了夸张的行为,后看蛇的动物明知会被吓到,还是“故意”去看了,如此循环……

这是比较古老的证据,现代的一些研究在其他动物中也发现了这种情况,比如长尾黑颚猴也会这样做,它们会仔细地打量捕食者,而非看到就逃跑。在黑猩猩和大猩猩中,也有证据显示,如果某个地方有一具同类的尸体,它们会去戳戳、拨弄它,这种举动可能代表了它们对这里发生过的“谋杀案”感到好奇。

在人类世界,恐怖游戏也是病态好奇心的一种延伸。斯克里夫纳深入研究了人们迷恋恐怖游戏的原因,据他所说,恐怖游戏是将恐怖、危险、恶心或其他存在潜在威胁的事物置于游戏语境中,并尽量将其控制在合适的范围内,让你能更好地理解并享受这种感觉,而不仅仅是忍受这种体验。恐怖游戏给人们带来的感受类似于灵长类动物偷看活蛇:在群体中不断重复惊吓体验,既害怕又兴奋,还有致命的吸引力。

但人类对惊悚游戏的热衷还是远超其他物种,因为我们拥有讲故事的能力。哪怕并不身处危险之中,我们依然能够创造出虚构的恐怖情景。因此,在许多以恐怖为底色的娱乐活动中,那只吸引我们去窥探的袋子里装的甚至不是真正的活蛇,我们所进行的窥探也不一定是真实的,可以隔着屏幕或书本,或者仅仅是个人的想象、听别人讲述他们经历的故事。

我们可以设想无数种可怕的情境,对其进行调整和处理,将它们包装成某种特定的格式或故事情节,然后与之互动。我们可以通过戏剧或捉迷藏等游戏形式来演绎这些情境,回忆一下这些游戏的玩法,你会发现,它们在本质上模拟了捕食者与猎物之间的互动。比如,在捉迷藏中,总会有一个人是“追捕者”,一旦被抓住,你就成了“追捕者”,或直接被淘汰出局。

如今,人类社会发展出了各种形式的游戏活动,无论是面对面有肢体接触的打闹玩耍,还是虚构的叙事,如电子游戏、电影等,都让我们能够在相对安全的情况下参与或围观各种惊险场景,事实证明,我们通常乐在其中。
 
除了纯粹的娱乐和感官体验,在安全的环境中感受恐惧在演化上和对个人发展来说还具有一些特别的意义。在其他动物中,观察捕食者可以帮助它们更好地了解潜在的威胁。斯克里夫纳表示,这对人类来说也是如此,虽然随着想象力和技术的发展,现在人们体验过的许多恐惧场景都是虚构的,或许根本不可能在现实生活中发生。

但只要我们想,就可以做出模拟真实生活场景的惊悚游戏。比如在疫情期间,一部早在2011年就上映的惊悚灾难片《传染病》Contagion重新回到人们的视线,到2020年3月,它突然成为全球观看次数最多的电影之一。这并非巧合,人们发现,它是最接近当时情况的影视作品,因此可以通过电影中的情境学习应对现实生活中的病毒流行。
 
一项2021年发表于《人格与个体差异》Personality and Individual Differences研究表明,恐怖电影爱好者在新冠疫情期间较少产生心理困扰,爱看“末日生存者”电影人们称自己会因此为疫情做好了更充分的准备。而有病态好奇心的人在新冠疫情期间表现出了更强的心理韧性。

除了在特定情境下学习如何应对之外,玩恐怖游戏或看惊悚电影最大的益处,其实在于它们可以帮助你管理恐惧和焦虑情绪。当你以一种轻松的心态去面对虚构的恐怖情境,它给你留出了足够的安全空间,你就可以退一步、暂停、自我调整,感受这些情绪而不必面对与之相关的危险。你可以在其中练习处理这些情绪,感受它、经历它,最后调节它们,成为情绪的掌控者。

为了促进儿童和青少年的数字心理健康,情绪与心理健康游戏实验室(Games for Emotional and Mental Health Lab)开发了一款专为儿童设计的神经反馈恐怖游戏,名为MindLight,它可以在脑电图头带等生物反馈仪器的辅助下,将情绪转化为实时游戏输入。在游戏中,孩子们须要面对各种怪物,如果感到过于焦虑,游戏会让他们暂停,练习认知行为疗法中的某些技巧,以顺利渡过恐怖时刻,继续游戏,直至完成。

研究表明,这种方法可将8~12岁儿童的焦虑水平降低50%,与目前用于减轻和治疗焦虑的一线疗法,即认知行为疗法的效果近似。仅需6~8次有趣的游戏体验,即可减轻焦虑。这一发现将造福许多育有自闭症谱系障碍儿童的家庭,同时对饱受焦虑困扰的青少年和成年人也同样有效。

后续,斯克里夫纳希望进一步深入研究如何通过恐怖游戏帮助人们克服抑郁或创伤后应激障碍,并解释其背后的作用机制,以便针对不同的人群和不同的情绪问题,对症下药地调整游戏体验,使其在具备普遍吸引力的同时,也能更普遍地起到治疗效果。




Why We Love to Be Spooked


Rachel Feltman: For Scientific American’s Science Quickly, this is Rachel Feltman. As most of you listening to this probably know, I’m pretty into podcasts. But my first experiences with the format—or at least the ones that really hooked me—weren’t the science shows you might expect. I first got into audio by listening to horror podcasts. I’d creep myself out listening to The Black Tapes and The Magnus Archives, feeling so viscerally spooked that sometimes I actually had trouble sleeping.


Even if you’re not a horror fan yourself, you can’t deny that humans on the whole seem to really like getting scared. That’s especially apparent this time of year, what with all the haunted houses and spooky hayrides on offer for Halloween. But what is it about fear that draws us in?


My guest today is an expert on precisely that. Coltan Scrivner is a behavioral scientist at the Recreational Fear Lab at Aarhus University in Denmark and the Psychology Department at Arizona State University. He investigates what he calls the “evolutionary and psychological underpinnings of morbid curiosity and our fascination with the darker side of life.”


Coltan, thanks so much for coming on to talk today.


Coltan Scrivner: Yeah, happy to be here.

Feltman: So what got you interested in studying fear?


Scrivner: When I was in graduate school, I just became interested in this idea that people sometimes go and watch violence for fun when, in almost every other case, violence is seen as immoral, is pushed to the edges of society, is punished. But there are very circumscribed cases throughout history and across cultures where violence is not only okay but sometimes celebrated.


Feltman: Mm.


Scrivner: And so I started out kind of with that, what seemed like a paradox, there. And over time that kind of evolved into: “Well, people also scare themselves for fun, right? Why do they do that?” And that kind of meshed with the interest in violence. And over time that sort of evolved into this research program that I have on morbid curiosity.


Feltman: So what do we know about morbid curiosity? Why do humans like stuff that scares them or grosses them out?


Scrivner: Well, most people don’t enjoy the feelings of being grossed out, for example. But a lot of people will look if you say, “Oh, my gosh, this is so gross; you have to see this,” right? So it is kind of a weird thing. And, you know, one thing that I’ve found from my research is that a lot of people, especially when it comes to fear, may not necessarily enjoy the feeling of fear itself. Some people do: adrenaline junkies, for example, people, like, who like skydiving or who like roller coasters or things like that. And a lot of people—like a lot of horror fans even, for example—actually don’t necessarily enjoy the feeling of being afraid, but they do enjoy the feeling of overcoming that fear ...


Feltman: Hmm.


Scrivner: They enjoy the sort of, you know, self-confidence you get from tackling something difficult. And I think, you know, humans see this in other areas of their life, but it’s interesting, too, that it shows up in this sort of entertainment sector as well.


Feltman: Are we the only animals who like getting scared on purpose?


Scrivner: I don’t think so. You know, it’s always hard to tell what other animals enjoy versus don’t enjoy and just sort of—it’s hard to interpret behaviors, right, in that way. But we’re certainly not the only animals that put themselves in scary situations when they don’t have to or watch scary things when they don’t have to.


So for example, if you’re out [in the] Serengeti, you might see some Thomson’s gazelles grazing about, and you might see a cheetah kind of in the background, which is one of their natural predators. And what you’ll see is that—you know, you would expect if—you know, I’m not a gazelle, but if I was a gazelle, I would think, “Okay, if I saw a cheetah, I should probably run every single time,” right?


But that’s not actually what you see. Instead what you see is that some of the gazelles will actually stop and observe the cheetah. And it’s not random which gazelles do this; it’s actually the adolescents and the subadults, so kind of those gazelles who are young and healthy and fit and could escape if something happened but maybe don’t have as much exposure to their natural predators yet.


So the assumption there is that they are trying to learn something about their natural predators because, you know, cheetahs, like most cats, spend about 23 out of 24 hours of the day just lounging, right, and not actually hunting or eating or doing anything else. And so it’d be pretty inefficient for prey animals in general to always run every time they saw a predator. So instead what animals tend to do is gather information about potential threats, in particular their predators.


Feltman: That’s super interesting. What about primates? Do we have any research on how they engage with scary stuff?


Scrivner: Yeah, so there’s actually a pretty old observation of what I would consider morbid curiosity in primates. But [Charles] Darwin talks about it. He talks about hearing of this story where a man had a [box] with ... snake[s]..., live snake[s] in it, which obviously is a threat to most primates. He was in a zoo, and he would kind of set the bag down, and the primates would come up one by one and peek inside the bag, shriek, run about. But instead of the other primates running away, they would come up and do the same thing. It’s kind of like the “Here’s this scary thing; you have to see this,” right?


Feltman: Yeah.


Scrivner: I mean, I don’t know if they were enjoying it, right? That’s always hard to say. But they were certainly engaging in that behavior intentionally, knowing that it was something that scared one of the troop members. And Darwin actually replicated this experiment because he was so intrigued by it.


So, I mean, there’s some evidence there. There’s some more modern evidence, I think with vervet monkeys, that they do this as well; they inspect predators rather than just always running away. There’s, of course, some evidence in, I think, chimpanzees and, and maybe gorillas, too, that if there’s a dead conspecific somewhere, they will actually kind of go and poke it and prod at it, and, and there’s kind of an intrigue or a curiosity there about what it is or what happened.


Feltman: Mm, so I know you have done some work on the idea of scary play. Could you tell me more about what that is and what benefit it has for us?


Scrivner: Yeah, so scary play is, I think, just an extension of morbid curiosity, right? It’s when you take something scary or dangerous or gross or potentially threatening and you put it in a playful context so that you can better understand it and sort of enjoy that experience, as opposed to just tolerate that experience.


So like those monkeys, for example, peering inside of a bag with a snake in it, I would—you know, that’s something very close to scary play because they kept going back and doing it and seemed to, you know, be afraid while also intrigued and thrilled.


But of course, you know, no species engages in scary play quite like humans do, and that’s because we have storytelling, right? Basically, we can create fictional scenarios where we’re not actually in any danger. So we’re not peeking inside of a bag with a real snake in it; we’re watching someone else do that on a screen, right, or in a book, when they’re—we’re imagining the scenario or listening to a story of someone who did that.


And so what we can do then is we can take, you know, almost a numerous number of scenarios where there’s something threatening happening, and we can tweak it and play with it and, and make it in this very specific format or this very specific storyline, and we can kind of play with that. We can act it out through theater or through games like tag or hide-and-seek, which are pretty basic predator-prey interactions, right? If you watch kids play games like tag or hide-and-seek, there’s always one person who’s “it,” who’s hunting the other people, and if they catch you, you’re “it,” or you’re out, right?


And so I think, you know, humans do this in, in all kinds of different ways, whether it’s through physical sort of rough-and-tumble play or through imaginative stories: through video games or movies or other kinds of storytelling. We engage in all kinds of scary scenarios when they’re relatively safe—and, often enjoy it.


Feltman: Yeah, and what do you think some of the sort of, I don’t know, evolutionary or personal benefits of that are?


Scrivner: Yeah, well, you know, if—in other animals, the benefits of something like predator inspection, where you’re actually watching the predator, is to learn about threats, right? And I think that’s probably true in humans, maybe less so now that we have—you know, most of our scary play comes through fictional scenarios that may or may not ever exist.


But certainly, we can engage in scary play that mimics real-life scenarios. You know, we saw this, I would say, in 2020 with the pandemic. You had Contagion, which was, at that time, I think a nine-year-old movie ...


Feltman: Mm.


Scrivner: That kind of fell into obscurity. I mean, it was kind of popular when it came out, but it quickly fell into obscurity, and then in March of 2020 it became [one of] the most-watched movie[s] in the world, you know, and I don’t think that’s a coincidence, right? People were seeking out—in some ways, cognitively playing with—you know, what happens during a global pandemic, and the closest thing they could find to that was Contagion.


But I think there are other benefits as well besides just, you know, literally learning what to do in certain scenarios. I think the biggest benefit actually comes from your ability to manage feelings of fear and anxiety. Because if you set something in a playful frame, it allows you to kind of step back and pause and collect yourself and feel those emotions without the associated danger with them. And what that allows you to do is kind of practice dealing with those emotions—practice feeling afraid, practice feeling anxious—and practice kind of regulating those.


And we see that, you know, in—there’s some research out of the Games—I think it’s the Games for Emotional and Mental Health Lab. They’ve created a game called MindLight that does exactly that; it’s a scary game for kids. They wear a EEG band, and it gives them some, some biofeedback. And basically, the kids play this scary game and, you know, have to face these different kinds of monsters, and if they get too anxious, it’ll have ’em pause and practice certain kinds of techniques from cognitive-behavioral therapy and kind of get through that scary moment so that they can continue the game and play through to the end. And it’s been shown to be, you know, as effective as cognitive-behavioral therapy in reducing anxiety, which is pretty incredible because that’s, like, the gold standard for reducing and treating anxiety.

Feltman: Yeah, very cool. What do you think people can learn from the fact that, you know, we have this really interesting, very old relationship with morbid curiosity?


Scrivner: I think a lot of people, you know, when they first experience that, or, you know, let’s say someone is a horror fan, it can be kind of alienating if other people aren’t horror fans and they don’t understand, you know, “Oh, this person likes movies where people are dying or where there’s blood and gore, so they must be a psychopath or have no empathy.” And, you know, my research shows that that’s actually almost, if anything, the opposite: horror fans not only have pretty much the same levels of empathy as other people, they actually...[full transcript]




订阅最新“科学60秒”英语新闻


不再漏掉任何一次新知 plus 练耳的机会~


图片