《10到25岁》第二章(4)：三种心态框架：一个思想史

Kurt Lewin was a Jewish scientist who was forced to flee Nazi Germany before WWII. He came to the United States and settled at the University of Iowa, where he founded the discipline of social psychology. His experiences with anti-Jewish discrimination gave him a long-standing interest in leadership styles that promote freedom and democracy. In 1939, Lewin published a revolutionary experiment.

库尔特·勒温是一位犹太科学家，在二战前被迫逃离纳粹德国。他来到美国，定居在爱荷华大学，并创立了社会心理学学科。他对抗犹太歧视的经历使他长期关注促进自由和民主的领导风格。1939年，勒温发表了一项革命性的实验。

Lewin’s experiment contrasted leadership styles in an unlikely setting: after-school arts and crafts clubs for preteen boys. The boys in Lewin’s study were assigned to one of three different kinds of adult leaders. One group got a leader who used an enforcer mindset (which Lewin called authoritarian). This leader demanded, yelled, shamed, cajoled, embarrassed, and prodded. A second group got a protector mindset (which Lewin called laissez-faire). This nice and friendly leader expected little, gave no structure, and acted cool with anything and everything. A third group leader had a mentor mindset (which Lewin called democratic). This leader expected students to work hard and accomplish a lot and provided emotional and material support. The leader gently guided students to improve their projects using Socratic questioning. He didn’t tell the boys how to create their projects, and he didn’t praise them if the work wasn’t adequate. Crucially, Lewin had the same adult facilitators play the different roles in different weeks, so that he could more precisely assess leadership styles, not just the personalities of the facilitators.

勒温的实验在一个不太可能的场景中对比了领导风格：不到10岁男孩的课后的艺术和手工俱乐部。勒温研究中的男孩被分配到三种不同类型的成人领导者之一。一组得到了一个使用强制心态的领导者（勒温称之为权威型）。这位领导者要求严格，大声喊叫，羞辱，哄骗，使人为难，并不断催促。第二组得到了一个保护心态的领导者（勒温称之为放任型）。这位和蔼可亲的领导者期望不高，不进行组织，对任何事情都表现得轻松随意。第三组领导者具有导师心态（勒温称之为民主型）。这位领导者期望学生努力工作并取得大量成就，并提供情感和物质支持。领导者通过苏格拉底式提问温和地引导学生改进他们的项目。他没有告诉男孩们如何创作他们的项目，如果工作不够好，他也不会表扬他们。关键的是，勒温让相同的成人辅导员在不同的星期扮演不同的角色，以便他更准确地评估领导风格，而不仅仅是辅导员的人格特质。

What happened? A few weeks in, the enforcer-mindset club was “dull, lifeless, submissive, repressed, apathetic; there was little smiling, joking, freedom of movement.” Children hated the enforcer-mindset club, even though they complied and dutifully made their art projects. What were the mentor-mindset clubs like? “The interactions in the mentor-mindset club were more spontaneous, more fact- minded, and friendly. Relations to the leader were free and on an ‘equality basis,” Lewin observed.

发生了什么？几周后，强制心态的俱乐部变得“乏味、无生气、顺从、压抑、冷漠；几乎没有微笑、玩笑、自由活动”。孩子们讨厌强制心态的俱乐部，尽管他们服从并尽职地制作他们的艺术项目。导师心态的俱乐部是怎样的呢？“导师心态俱乐部的互动更加自发、更注重事实、更友好。与领导者的关系自由且基于‘平等基础’，”勒温观察到。

Lewin examined which club created more internalized motivation. He did so by having the group leaders let students vote on disbanding the clubs. In the enforcer- mindset groups, students immediately voted to discontinue. One by one students threw their projects on the ground and tried to destroy them. They were giddy, like the last day of school in a teen movie. Students “chased each other around the room wildly” with toilet paper rolls, Lewin observed: “Rather clearly, the work products of this enforcer-mindset atmosphere seemed to be objects of aggressive attack rather than prideful ownership.” What about the low-expectations protector- mindset group? Students hadn’t created very much, but what they did they discarded. They also voted to discontinue. How about the mentor-mindset leader? There, the students were invested in their art projects, which were often of higher quality. They wanted to keep working on them even though they didn’t have to because they were proud of what they had created.

勒温考察了哪个俱乐部创造了更多的内在动机。他通过让小组领导者让学生投票决定是否解散俱乐部来做到这一点。在强制心态的小组中，学生们立即投票决定停止。学生们一个接一个地把他们的项目扔在地上，试图毁掉它们。他们兴高采烈，就像青少年电影中的最后一天。勒温观察到，学生们“疯狂地在房间里互相追逐，用卫生纸卷筒扔来扔去”：“相当明显，这种强制心态氛围下的工作成果似乎成了攻击的对象，而不是自豪的成果。”那么低期望的保护心态小组呢？学生们没有创造太多东西，但他们所做的东西都被丢弃了。他们也投票决定停止。导师心态的领导者呢？在那里，学生们投身于他们的艺术项目，这些项目通常质量更高。他们想要继续工作，即使他们不必这样做，因为他们为自己所创造的东西感到自豪。

Which leader did the youth like the most? The enforcer-mindset leader topped the most disliked list, with 95 percent of kids. Few kids liked the protector-mindset leader, although they appreciated that “he wasn’t strict” and “we could do what we pleased.” Still, “he had too few things for us to do.” The protector didn’t push them as hard as they wanted to be pushed. In the beginning, it was fun to have no rules, but ultimately the students yearned for structure and attention.

哪个领导者最受年轻人喜欢？强制心态的领导者高居最不受欢迎的榜首，有95%的孩子不喜欢。很少有孩子喜欢保护心态的领导者，尽管他们感激“他不太严格”并且“我们可以做自己想做的事”。不过，“他给我们做的事情太少了。”保护者没有像他们希望的那样推动他们。一开始，没有规则很有趣，但最终学生们渴望组织和关注。

How about the mentor-mindset leader, with his combination of high expectations and high support? He was “just the right combination,” students concluded. “He was a good sport, worked along with us, and thought of things just like we do.” And “he never did try to be the boss, but we always had plenty to do.” “We all liked him,” they said.

那么，结合高期望和高支持，拥有导师心态的领导者，怎么样呢？学生们总结道：“他恰到好处。”“他是个好运动员，和我们一起工作，想法和我们一样。”而且“他从不试图当老板，但我们总是有很多事情要做。”“我们都喜欢他，”他们说。

A few decades later, Diana Baumrind showed that Lewin’s leadership styles applied to parenting as well. Baumrind completed her PhD in 1955 under the direction of Hubert Coffey, who was one of Lewin’s students at the University of Iowa in the 1930s. Baumrind noticed that parents, like Lewin’s leaders, tended to differ on the same two dimensions in figure 2.1 above: how demanding they were (their high standards) and how warm they were (how responsive and supportive).

几十年后，戴安娜·鲍姆林德表明勒温的领导风格也适用于育儿。鲍姆林德于1955年在休伯特·科菲的指导下完成了她的博士学业，科菲是勒温在20世纪30年代爱荷华大学的学生之一。鲍姆林德注意到，父母和勒温的领导者一样，往往在图2.1中提到的两个维度上有所不同：他们的要求有多高（他们的高标准）以及他们有多温暖（他们有多响应和支持）。

Baumrind called parents who were very demanding but unsupportive authoritarian. This is akin to the enforcer mindset. Baumrind also saw lots of parents who were not demanding but very warm. She labeled them permissive. This group was similar to the protector mindset. Baumrind’s research, conducted over decades, showed that enforcer and protector parents were both mote likely to raise poorly adjusted children. There was a third group, however. The parents who raised the most well-adjusted children scored high on both demandingness and warmth. They were called authoritative. This was similar to the mentor mindset (see figure 2.2). To complete the square, the psychologist Eleanor Maccoby later named the low-standards, low-warmth style neglectful; I have called it apathetic.

鲍姆林德称那些要求很高但不支持的父母为专制型。这类似于强制心态。鲍姆林德还看到很多父母要求不高但非常温暖。她将他们称为放任型。这一群体类似于保护心态。鲍姆林德数十年的研究表明，强制者和保护心态的父母都更有可能抚养出适应不良的孩子。然而，还有第三组。抚养出最适应良好的孩子的父母在要求和支持上都得分很高。他们被称为权威型。这类似于导师心态（见图2.2）。为了完善这个框架，心理学家埃莉诺·麦科比后来将低标准、低温暖风格命名为忽视型；我称之为冷漠型。

To illustrate what enforcer and protector parenting looks like today, I recently conducted a small study in which I briefly described Baumrind’s parenting styles to parents and youth. Then I asked them to tell me about times when they’ve seen these styles in their own lives.

为了说明当今强制者和保护心态的育儿方式，我最近进行了一项小型研究，我在研究中简要地向父母和年轻人描述了鲍姆林德的育儿风格。然后我让他们告诉我他们在自己生活中看到这些风格的例子。

Sam, a seventeen-year-old, told me his father takes an enforcer approach. “He’s always expecting me to get nothing but A-pluses in every class no matter what.” Sam feels like he’s using every resource available to him to do well in school, but he’s never perfect. After all, he’s taking college courses like calculus and physics. Sam’s dad tells him he’s just not applying himself. “Go figure it out,” his dad told him. Sam is overwhelmed by the absence of support. “Not being able to keep up with his high standards affects your mental health,” he told me. Sam is starting to feel alone and helpless.

十七岁的萨姆告诉我，他的父亲采用强制方式。“他总是期望我在每门课上都能得到全优，不管怎样。”萨姆觉得自己已经用尽所有资源在学校表现良好，但他从未完美。毕竟，他正在学习像微积分和物理这样的大学课程。萨姆的爸爸告诉他，他只是没有尽力。“自己想办法，”他爸爸告诉他。萨姆因缺乏支持而感到不知所措。“无法达到他的高标准会影响你的心理健康，”他告诉我。萨姆开始感到孤独和无助。

Here’s another example. When Alicia’s parents saw her struggle to try something new—a sport, a game, or even a new friendship—they would rush in to protect her. They told her, “That’s okay, you don’t have to do it if it’s too hard.” She saw it on their faces: their fear and anxiety when she expressed the smallest amount of frustration. Her parents were motivated by a genuine desire to protect Alicia until she grew old enough to fend for herself. However, the age at which they would stop protecting her kept getting pushed back (fourteen, fifteen, sixteen, seventeen…). “While it made me comfortable,” Alicia told me, “it also made me really scared. I felt like I was unprepared for being independent or going out in the world.”

再举一个例子。当艾丽西亚的父母看到她努力尝试新事物——一项运动、一个游戏，甚至一段新的友谊时——他们会冲进来保护她。他们告诉她：“没关系，如果你觉得太难，你不必做。”她从他们的脸上看到了：当她表达出最微小的挫败感时，他们的恐惧和焦虑。她的父母出于保护艾丽西亚直到她长大到能够自立的真实愿望而这样做。然而，他们停止保护她的年龄一直在推迟（十四岁、十五岁、十六岁、十七岁……）。“虽然这让我感到舒适，”艾丽西亚告诉我，“但也让我真的很害怕。我觉得自己没有为独立或走向世界做好准备。”

Later in her career, Baumrind realized that many people were misinterpreting her research in a critical way. Because her “authoritative” (mentor mindset) parenting style had its roots in Lewin’s democratic leadership, people thought that the ideal leadership style was one that ceded all control to young people, allowing them to debate endlessly and control the group’s agenda with a consensus vote. Naming it “democratic” was bad branding on Lewin’s part. Baumrind spent much of her later years clarifying that “authoritative” (mentor mindset) leaders often appear quite tough and demanding to observers—even setting out the agenda and expecting young people to follow it. Importantly, they are always supportive enough so that young people can meet the high standards.

在职业生涯后期，鲍姆林德意识到很多人以关键的方式误解了她的研究。因为她的“权威型”（导师心态）育儿风格源于勒温的民主领导，人们认为理想的领导风格是那种完全放弃对年轻人的控制，允许他们无休止地辩论并通过共识投票控制小组议程的风格。将其命名为“民主”是勒温的错误品牌定位。鲍姆林德在后来的许多年里澄清，“权威型”（导师心态）领导者在外人看来往往非常严格和有要求——甚至设定议程并期望年轻人遵循。重要的是，他们总是足够支持，以便年轻人能够达到高标准。

The parenting expert Dr. Becky Kennedy, in her book Good Inside, echoes this sentiment: “I can parent in a way… that involves firm boundaries and warm connection, that gives my kids what they need today and sets them up for resilience in the future.” The key to doing this, she says, is to realize that upholding high standards (e.g., setting firm limits on screen time or not letting your kids go to an unsupervised party) is entirely separate from caring about their feelings about our standards (e.g., their fear of missing out or facing peer rejection). We don’t have to choose standards or support; both can work together.

育儿专家贝基·肯尼迪博士在她的书《看见孩子》中呼应了这一观点：“我可以以一种……涉及坚定界限和温暖联系的方式育儿，这既能满足我的孩子今天的需要，又能为他们的未来韧性打下基础。”她说，做到这一点的关键是认识到坚持高标准（例如，严格限制屏幕时间或不让孩子参加无人监督的派对）与关心他们对我们的标准的感受（例如，他们的错失恐惧或面对同伴排斥的恐惧）是完全分开的。我们不必在标准和支持之间做出选择；两者可以一起工作。

At around the same time Baumrind’s work started getting noticed, the same basic principles were independently discovered in the context of teaching by a scholar in an entirely different field, using entirely different methods. Dr. Rosalie Wax was a prominent cultural anthropologist in the middle of the twentieth century. After Wax completed her PhD dissertation at the University of Chicago, her brilliant career was derailed by sexism. The university didn’t pay her a salary because of a rule that said women could not be paid if their husbands already had a salary. (Wax’s husband was a professor at the University of Chicago.) Her experiences with bias spurred her to try to help others, eventually leading to a study of the dire educational conditions on the Pine Ridge Reservation in South Dakota. There, Wax found that the most common educational approach was an enforcer mindset. The enforcer teachers saw it as their duty to uphold the intellectual history and cultural ideology of mainstream American culture, to the detriment of Indigenous culture. Wax observed that the Native American students hated these cold expectations, and they rebelled. They created a “silent classroom,” refusing to do any work.

在鲍姆林德的工作开始受到关注的同时，相同的基本原则在完全不同的领域、使用完全不同的方法被独立发现。罗莎莉·瓦克斯是二十世纪中叶一位杰出的文化人类学家。瓦克斯在芝加哥大学完成博士论文后，她辉煌的职业生涯因性别歧视而脱轨。由于一项规定女性在丈夫已有薪水的情况下不能获得薪水的规则，大学没有支付她的薪水。（瓦克斯的丈夫是芝加哥大学的教授。）她的关于偏见的经历促使她试图帮助他人，最终导致了对南达科他州松岭保留地严峻教育状况的研究。在那里，瓦克斯发现最常见的教育方法是强制心态。强制型教师认为他们的职责是维护主流美国文化的知识史和文化意识形态，损害了土著文化。瓦克斯观察到，美洲原住民学生讨厌这些冷漠的期望，他们反抗。他们创造了“沉默的课堂”，拒绝做任何工作。

Wax observed a few warm and friendly teachers with low expectations. They had a protector mindset. These teachers weren’t mean, but they harbored negative views of students’ potential. They acted as though Native students’ minds were “meager, empty, or lacking in pattern,” only capable of rote memorization. Students didn’t engage in deep thinking. They learned very little.

瓦克斯观察到一些温暖友好的教师，但期望很低。他们具有保护心态。这些教师并不刻薄，但他们对学生潜力持有负面看法。他们表现得好像土著学生的心智“贫乏、空虚或缺乏模式”，只能进行死记硬背。学生没有进行深度思考。他们学到的东西很少。

Wax also found a small handful of teachers who created classrooms full of wonder, learning, and of course, discipline and hard work.

瓦克斯还发现少数教师创造了充满奇迹、学习和当然还有纪律和努力工作的课堂。

There are a few teachers who develop fine classrooms and teach their pupils a great deal. These teachers are difficult to describe because they are remarkably different in background and personality and some are “real characters” in the sense that this word was used fifty years ago. In general, they differ from the less successful instructors in that they respect their pupils. By this, we mean that they treat them as if something worthy of respect was already there. These teachers… do not tolerate nonsense… All are very fair and all are extremely skillful in avoiding a situation which would embarrass a shy student before the class. They tend to place a heavy emphasis on scholastic work.

有一些教师发展出了优秀的课堂，并教会了学生很多东西。这些教师很难描述，因为他们背景和个性迥异，有些是五十年前意义上的“真正的人物”。总的来说，他们与不太成功的教师的不同之处在于他们尊重学生。我们指的是他们对待学生就好像那里已经有值得尊重的东西一样。这些教师……不容忍胡闹……所有人都非常公平，所有人都极其擅长避免让学生在课堂上感到尴尬的情况。他们倾向于强调学术工作。

Later authors would label Wax’s superteachers warm demanders. They demanded, and gave, respect, but they were also warm in that they cared about the students’ welfare. This is a strong parallel to the mentor mindset. In Wax’s study, the mentor-mindset teachers’ respect for the Native American students was rooted in their belief that they had something of value to contribute and should be taken seriously. In general, when that respect comes from someone in a powerful position —like a teacher—it leaves an impression, especially for young people who experience the adolescent predicament and crave status and respect. With mentor mindsets, adults lay a foundation of respectful relationships. Then they take young people seriously and expect them to live up to their potential, while providing the necessary supports. Young people subsequently find the motivation to do the right thing.

后来的作者将瓦克斯的超级教师称为“温暖的要求者”。他们要求并给予尊重，但他们也很温暖，因为他们关心学生的福祉。这与导师心态非常相似。在瓦克斯的研究中，导师心态教师对美洲原住学生的尊重源于他们相信这些学生有贡献价值并应被认真对待。一般来说，当这种尊重来自一个有权势的人——比如教师——时，它会留下印象，尤其是对于那些经历青少年困境并渴望地位和尊重的年轻人。有了导师心态，成年人奠定了尊重关系的基础。然后他们认真对待年轻人，期望他们发挥潜力，同时提供必要的支持。年轻人随后找到了做正确事的动机。

More recently, business leaders have begun to study styles of leadership, and they have similarities to the work of Lewin, Baumrind, and Wax. The popular business author Kim Scott laid out different styles for how managers can give feedback to their direct reports, and these have fascinating parallels with the mentor mindset, the enforcer mindset, and the protector mindset. According to Scott, managers who practice radical candor give their direct reports honest critical feedback and voice clear statements that make their positive intentions transparent. This is like the mentor mindset. Scott contrasts this with obnoxious aggression (analogous to the enforcer mindset) and ruinous empathy (analogous to the protector mindset). Scott argues that these feedback styles can have a powerful impact on employee morale; for example, during performance management conversations. I agree.

最近，商业领袖们开始研究领导风格，并且与勒温、鲍姆林德和瓦克斯的工作有相似之处。流行的商业作家金·斯科特列举了管理者可以向直接下属提供反馈的不同风格，这些风格与导师心态、强制心态和保护心态有惊人的相似之处。根据斯科特的说法，实践“激进坦诚”的管理者向直接下属提供诚实的批评性反馈，并明确表达他们的积极意图。这就像导师心态。斯科特将其与“令人讨厌的攻击性”（类似于强制心态）和“毁灭性的同理心”（类似于保护心态）进行对比。斯科特认为，这些反馈风格可以对员工士气产生强大影响；例如，在绩效管理对话中。我同意。