听众们在音频质量较好的时候会给科学家的电台采访更多的信任。克里斯托弗·因塔利亚塔报道。

撰文\播音：克里斯托弗·因塔利亚塔（Christopher Intagliata）

翻译：邱燕宁

审校：杨枭

In the era of fake news it's worth remembering: the medium is the message. For example: psychological studies have shown that text that's hard to read is more likely to be deemed untrue. Now a study suggests that when radio shows interview guests over bad phone lines, listeners might discount the credibility of a speaker…and her work. 

在假新闻泛滥的时代，需要记住:传播媒介就是信息。例如:心理学研究表明，难以阅读的文本更有可能被认为是不真实的。现在一项研究表明，当广播节目通过糟糕的电话连接状态来采访客人时，听众可能会低估发言人的可信度，以及她的工作。

"We find, over and over again, that the easier something is to process, the more likely you are to assume that it's true. And the more compelling you find it." Norbert Schwarz is a social and cognitive psychologist at the University of Southern California…who readily agreed to record himself in a higher quality format for this story than we’d get by recording his phone line. 

“我们一次又一次地发现，信息越容易处理，你就越有可能认为它是真实的，并发现它更有吸引力。” 诺伯特·施瓦茨（Norbert Schwarz）是南加州大学的一名社会和认知心理学家，他欣然同意以更高质的方式记录自己的报道，而不是通过电话联系。

Schwarz and his collaborator Eryn Newman asked 99 volunteers to listen to an interview about genetics on the public radio program Science Friday. One recording was presented in normal phone quality: <>. But the other was tampered with, to cut its quality even more: <> Hard to hear, and less compelling.

施瓦茨和他的合作者埃琳·纽曼（Eryn Newman）要求99名志愿者听取公共电台节目Science Friday上一个关于遗传学的采访。一个录音以正常的质量呈现：<成低质量的音频：<2>>很难听清，而且不太吸引人。

"In the condition where the audio quality is less good, same researcher—saying the exact same thing—it’s the same basic clip, is evaluated as being less qualified, being less good, being less convincing. And the message is assumed to reflect less important research. So basically, if your audio is not good, it hurts both your own credibility and the perceived quality of the research." 

“尽管是同样的研究人员——说同样的东西——相同的原始录音，但较差的音频被评价为不合格，不太好，不太令人信服。”研究本身也会因此被认为不那么重要。所以总体而言，如果你的声音质量不好，会同时损害你自己和研究本身的可信度和质量。

The researchers got similar results on a second experiment, using audio from talks delivered at scientific conference. The findings are in the journal Science Communication. [Eryn J. Newman and Norbert Schwarz Good Sound, Good Research: How Audio Quality Influences Perceptions of the Research and Researcher]

通过使用科学会议上发表的讲话音频，研究人员做了第二次实验，并得到了类似的结果。该结果发表在Science Communication杂志上。

Schwarz has obvious advice for audio producers, and their subjects: "Whenever you can, you should really try to get your interviewees at a good mic with a very good line. And as the interviewee it's really in your interest to look for a good connection."

施瓦茨给音频制作人及其对象提出了明确的建议：“只要你能做到，你就应该尽可能让你的受访者用一个通讯良好的线路和很好的麦克风接受采访，而作为受访者，寻找一个良好的通讯连接很有帮助”。

Here's one more reason to record higher quality interviews: volunteers were less likely to share lower-quality interviews on social media. A place where it's already hard enough to be heard above the noise.

这里还有一个额外的理由需要进行更高质量的访谈：志愿者们不太可能在社交媒体上分享质量较低的访谈。 这个地方（社交媒体）已经够难以听到噪音以外的东西了。