A Science-Supported Journaling Protocol to Improve Mental & Physical Health

Welcome to the Huberman Lab podcast, where we discuss science and science-based tools for everyday life.

欢迎来到休伯曼实验室播客，我们在这里讨论科学和基于科学的日常生活工具。

I'm Andrew Huberman, and I'm a professor of neurobiology and ophthalmology at Stanford School of Medicine.

我是安德鲁·胡伯曼，斯坦福大学医学院神经生物学和眼科教授。

Today, we are discussing journaling for mental and physical health.

今天，我们正在讨论日记对于身心健康的影响。

I want to emphasize that today's discussion is not a general discussion about the value of journaling.

我想强调的是，今天的讨论不是关于日记价值的一般性讨论。

Rather, it is a discussion about a particular form of journaling that the scientific peer-reviewed data says is especially powerful for improving our mental and physical health.

相反，这是关于一种特殊形式的日记的讨论，科学同行评审的数据表明，这种形式对于改善我们的身心健康特别有效。

In fact, what I will describe today is a journaling method that is supported by over 200 peer-reviewed studies in quality journals.

事实上，我今天要描述的是一种日记方法，该方法得到了高质量期刊中 200 多项同行评审研究的支持。

And I frankly was not aware of this journaling practice prior to researching this episode.

坦率地说，在研究这一集之前，我并不知道这种日记做法。

But in researching this episode, have come to discover that this practice should easily be placed among some of the other critical, so-called foundational pillar practices in terms of its impact on improving mental and physical health, including things like lowering anxiety, improving sleep, improving immunity to things like colds, flus, et cetera, as well as reducing the symptoms of autoimmune disorders such as arthritis, lupus, and also providing some relief for fibromyalgia, which is a condition of excessive pain.

但在研究这一事件的过程中，我们发现这种做法很容易被归入其他一些关键的、所谓的基础支柱做法，因为它对改善精神和身体健康有影响，包括降低焦虑、改善睡眠、提高对感冒、流感等的免疫力，以及减轻关节炎、狼疮等自身免疫性疾病的症状，还可以缓解纤维肌痛（一种过度疼痛的病症）。

The particular journaling method and protocol that I will describe has also been shown to improve various metrics of everyday living, including improved memory, decision-making, and on and on and on.

我将描述的特定日记方法和协议也被证明可以改善日常生活的各种指标，包括改善记忆力、决策能力等等。

So much so that, again, I was very surprised that I had not heard of this particular journaling method.

以至于我再次感到非常惊讶，因为我没有听说过这种特殊的日记方法。

One would think that if such a powerful method existed, that everyone would know about it.

有人会想，如果有这么强大的手段存在的话，那么所有人都会知道。

But it turns out that this particular journaling method has been somewhat cloistered within the fields of psychology and psychiatry.

但事实证明，这种特殊的日记方法在某种程度上与心理学和精神病学领域隔绝。

It's not that nobody was aware of it.

并不是没有人意识到这一点。

In fact, I learned about it for the first time from our associate chair of psychiatry at Stanford University School of Medicine, my colleague and collaborator, Dr. David Spiegel, who, as some of you may know, has been featured as a guest on this podcast previously.

事实上，我第一次从斯坦福大学医学院精神病学副院长、我的同事兼合作者 David Spiegel 博士那里了解到这一点，正如你们中的一些人可能知道的那样，他之前曾作为嘉宾出现在这个播客中。

And upon hearing about it, I decided to explore the primary research, that is, the studies that demonstrate the power of this particular journaling method, and was absolutely blown away by the positive impact this particular journaling method can have.

听到这个消息后，我决定探索初步研究，即证明这种特定日记方法的力量的研究，并且完全被这种特定日记方法可能产生的积极影响所震惊。

What's wonderful about it, you'll soon discover, is that it takes a relatively small amount of time.

您很快就会发现，它的美妙之处在于它只需要相对较少的时间。

In fact, it's something that you could do during the course of one week or even across one month and then never do again.

事实上，这是你可以在一周甚至一个月内做的事情，然后再也不会做。

And the data say that it would still have lasting positive benefits, both for body and mind.

数据表明，它仍然会对身体和精神产生持久的积极益处。

So while it's rare to feature one particular protocol as an entire Huberman Lab podcast, that is indeed what I will do today.

因此，虽然很少将某个特定协议作为整个 Huberman 实验室播客的特色，但这确实是我今天要做的。

It is important that we go into some depth about the specific protocol because there are some important details that everyone should know if they want to apply it and make it as effective as it can be.

我们深入了解特定协议非常重要，因为如果每个人想要应用该协议并使其尽可能有效，就应该了解一些重要的细节。

And in addition to that, we'll talk about some of the underlying science that's been published explaining why and how this protocol is so effective for mental and physical health.

除此之外，我们还将讨论一些已发表的基础科学，解释该协议为何以及如何对身心健康如此有效。

Before we begin, I'd like to emphasize that this podcast is separate from my teaching and research roles at Stanford.

在开始之前，我想强调一下，这个播客与我在斯坦福大学的教学和研究角色是分开的。

It is, however, part of my desire and effort to bring zero cost to consumer information about science and science-related tools to the general public.

然而，我的愿望和努力的一部分是向公众提供有关科学和科学相关工具的零成本消费者信息。

In keeping with that theme, I'd like to thank the sponsors of today's podcast.

为了与这个主题保持一致，我要感谢今天播客的赞助商。

Okay.

好的。

Let's talk about this particularly transformative form of journaling that initially was researched by Dr. James Pennebaker.

让我们来谈谈詹姆斯·彭尼贝克博士最初研究的这种特别具有变革性的日记形式。

James Pennebaker was a professor of psychology at Southern Methodist University when he first started researching this form of journaling and its positive impacts on the body and mind.

詹姆斯·彭尼贝克 (James Pennebaker) 是南卫理公会大学 (Southern Methodist University) 的心理学教授，他第一次开始研究这种形式的日记及其对身心的积极影响。

But he has since moved to the University of Texas, Austin, where he still runs a laboratory and has continued his studies on the role of journaling and other forms of language, both spoken and written, in terms of their impact on one's mental and physical health.

但后来他搬到了德克萨斯大学奥斯汀分校，在那里他仍然经营着一个实验室，并继续研究日记和其他形式的语言（包括口语和书面语言）对人的身心健康的影响。

So the origins of the research into this particular form of journaling started in the mid-'80s, and it was really in 1986 that the first published manuscript about this form of journaling was published.

因此，对这种特殊日记形式的研究始于 80 年代中期，而真正关于这种日记形式的第一份手稿是在 1986 年出版的。

Now, I want to be clear that prior to James Pennebaker studying this form of journaling, clearly others had used the form of journaling that I'm about to describe.

现在，我想澄清的是，在詹姆斯·彭尼贝克研究这种日记形式之前，显然其他人已经使用过我将要描述的日记形式。

However, it was Pennebaker that really started attaching measurements of the specific types of changes that occurred in people when they did this journaling in a particular way, and indeed came up with the precise protocol that we'll talk about today.

然而，彭尼贝克真正开始对人们以特定方式写日记时发生的特定类型的变化进行测量，并确实提出了我们今天要讨论的精确协议。

So Pennebaker and colleagues, and James Pennebaker in particular, really deserves credit for the discovery of this method.

因此，彭尼贝克和他的同事，尤其是詹姆斯·彭尼贝克，发现这种方法确实值得赞扬。

As you'll soon learn, Pennebaker was absolutely meticulous in figuring out exactly how long the method should be carried out, what exact forms of change occurred in the body and mind.

正如你很快就会了解到的那样，彭尼贝克绝对一丝不苟地计算出该方法应该执行多长时间，以及身体和心灵发生何种具体形式的变化。

He was careful to explore the method in the context of students as well as in the general population, in veterans, in elderly, in kids, and on and on.

他在学生、普通人群、退伍军人、老年人、儿童等等的背景下仔细探索了这种方法。

So it's really that incredible attention to detail and that scientific rigor that makes the protocol so incredibly powerful.

因此，正是对细节的令人难以置信的关注和科学的严谨性使得该协议如此强大。

So that first scientific study of this particular form of journaling, as I mentioned, was published in 1986, and I provided a link to that study in the show note captions.

因此，正如我所提到的，关于这种特殊日记形式的第一份科学研究发表于 1986 年，我在节目说明标题中提供了该研究的链接。

But what that study essentially consisted of was inviting undergraduate students into the university laboratory one at a time, and they were to spend 15 to 30 minutes writing about the most difficult, even traumatic or possibly non-traumatic, but still very difficult experience that they can recall from their entire life.

但这项研究的实质内容是邀请本科生一次进入大学实验室，让他们花 15 到 30 分钟写下他们一生中能回忆起的最困难的、甚至是创伤性的或可能没有创伤性的、但仍然非常困难的经历。

The instruction included that they should write for the entire time.

该指示包括他们应该全程写作。

That is because they were writing by hand in that particular experiment, that they were to not stop moving their hand for the entire duration of the 15 to 30 minutes.

这是因为他们在那个特定的实验中用手写字，因此在 15 到 30 分钟的整个过程中他们的手都不能停止移动。

And in addition to that, no one besides them, the person writing, would see what was written at the beginning, middle, or even after the experiment.

除此之外，除了他们之外，没有人会看到实验开始、中间、甚至实验结束时写的内容。

In fact, the students were invited to tear up the paper at the end of the writing exercise if they so chose.

事实上，学生们被邀请在写作练习结束时撕掉论文，如果他们愿意的话。

Okay, so the first key instruction is that they take a moment to think about what is the most difficult, perhaps even traumatic experience of their entire life.

好吧，第一个关键指示是，他们花点时间思考一下他们​​一生中最困难、甚至最痛苦的经历是什么。

The second instruction was that they were supposed to write for 15 to 30 minutes, and the third instruction was that they were supposed to write for the entire time.

第二个指示是他们应该写 15 到 30 分钟，第三个指示是他们应该一直写。

That at no point would they take a pause unless somehow, emotionally or physically, they were unable to keep moving their hand on the paper.

他们永远不会停下来，除非不知何故，无论是情感上还是身体上，他们无法继续在纸上移动手。

In fact, they were told to not pay attention to accurate grammar, to not pay attention to re-readability.

事实上，他们被告知不要注意准确的语法，不要注意重复可读性。

They were told, in fact, that their writing could be replete with spelling errors or grammatical errors.

事实上，他们被告知，他们的写作可能充满拼写错误或语法错误。

That didn't matter.

那没关系。

What was most important is that they tap into a particularly negatively charged memory of their prior life experience.

最重要的是，他们利用了对先前生活经历的特别负面的记忆。

Now, of course, because this was an experiment carried out in a university laboratory, there was a quiet place where the students could write undisturbed.

当然，因为这是在大学实验室进行的实验，所以有一个安静的地方，学生可以不受干扰地写作。

But since we're taking this particular protocol and we're exporting it to the real world through this podcast, so it's important that if you decide to implement this protocol in your own life, that you carry out the writing in a place where you will not be disturbed for that entire 15 to 30-minute duration.

但由于我们正在采用这个特定的协议，并通过这个播客将其导出到现实世界，所以如果您决定在自己的生活中实施这个协议，那么重要的是，您在整个 15 到 30 分钟的持续时间内不会受到打扰的地方进行写作。

It's also important that you know that even though that first 1986 study was done having students write out these memories by hand with a pen and paper, or a pencil and paper, there have been many subsequent studies that have explored whether or not the pen and paper was particularly important.

同样重要的是，你要知道，尽管 1986 年的第一项研究是让学生用笔和纸或铅笔和纸手写出这些记忆，但随后的许多研究都探讨了笔和纸是否特别重要。

It turns out it's not.

事实证明并非如此。

The exact same magnitude of positive effects are observed regardless of whether or not people write out their passage of words by hand or type it out on a word processor or any other form of writing.

无论人们是用手写下文字段落还是在文字处理机上或任何其他形式的书写上输入，都会观察到完全相同程度的积极影响。

Now, just to make sure that everyone gets the exact same protocol that was provided in that first initial study from Pennebaker and colleagues, and that has been used really over and over and over again for more than 200 peer-reviewed studies that demonstrate the power of this protocol, I'm going to read to you some of the specific instructions from that first study.

现在，为了确保每个人都获得与 Pennebaker 及其同事在第一项初步研究中提供的完全相同的方案，并且该方案已在 200 多项同行评审研究中反复使用，证明了该方案的强大功能，我将向您宣读第一项研究中的一些具体说明。

So the subjects were instructed to, quote, "Write about something that you are thinking about or worrying about way too much." Or if you're not thinking about or worrying about something way too much, perhaps you've deliberately tried to not think about this series of events or event, something that you've been dreaming about at night, perhaps in disturbing dreams, or something that you feel is affecting your life in an unhealthy way, either internally or externally.

因此，受试者被指示引用：“写下你正在思考或担心太多的事情。”或者，如果你没有太多地思考或担心某件事，也许你故意不去想这一系列的事件或事件，一些你在晚上梦到的事情，也许是在令人不安的梦中，或者一些你觉得正在以不健康的方式影响你的生活的事情，无论是内在的还是外在的。

So it could be in your emotional state, your inability to calm down when you want to be calm, maybe you're ruminating, maybe even compulsive thought.

所以可能是你的情绪状态，你想冷静的时候却无法冷静，也许你在沉思，甚至可能是强迫性的想法。

Maybe it's leading to addictive or compulsive or habitual behaviors.

也许它会导致上瘾、强迫或习惯性行为。

Or perhaps you can identify a specific trauma or set of traumas that you know are really plaguing your body and mind.

或者，也许您可​​以识别出一种或一组特定的创伤，您知道这些创伤确实困扰着您的身心。

The specific instructions that were given to the subjects in those experiments are the specific instructions that I'm going to give to you now, should you decide to implement this journaling protocol, and those instructions are as follows.

如果您决定实施此日记协议，那么在这些实验中向受试者提供的具体说明就是我现在要向您提供的具体说明，这些说明如下。

I want you to write down your deepest emotions and thoughts as they relate to the most upsetting experience in your life.

我希望你写下你最深的情感和想法，因为它们与你生活中最令人沮丧的经历有关。

Really let go and explore your feelings and thoughts about it.

真正放手并探索你对此的感受和想法。

As you write, you might tie this experience to your childhood, your relationship with your parents or siblings, people you have loved or love now, or even your career or schooling.

当你写作时，你可能会将这段经历与你的童年、你与父母或兄弟姐妹的关系、你曾经爱过或现在爱的人，甚至你的职业或学业联系起来。

How has this experience related to who you have now become, who you have been in the past, and who you would like to become?

这种经历与你现在成为的人、过去的人以及你想成为的人有何关系？

The instructions then continue to say, many people have not had a truly traumatic experience in their lives.

指示继续说，许多人一生中并没有经历过真正的创伤经历。

But everyone has had major conflicts or stressors, and you can write about the most dramatic or stressful experience you've ever had.

但每个人都经历过重大冲突或压力，你可以写下你经历过的最戏剧性或压力最大的经历。

Okay, so those are some of the key instructions that subjects in these experiments were given before they do the exercise.

好的，这些是这些实验中的受试者在进行练习之前得到的一些关键说明。

And of course, they were given a few minutes to think about what they wanted to write.

当然，他们有几分钟的时间来思考他们想写什么。

But once they selected what they wanted to write, they started writing.

但一旦他们选择了想要写的内容，他们就开始写作。

There was a timer going in the background for 15 to 30 minutes.

有一个计时器在后台运行 15 到 30 分钟。

And the reason, by the way, I keep saying 15 to 30 minutes is that some experiments employed a 30-minute period, other experiments employed a 20-minute period, others employed a 15-minute period.

顺便说一句，我之所以一直说15到30分钟，是因为有些实验采用了30分钟的时间，其他实验采用了20分钟的时间，其他实验采用了15分钟的时间。

Turns out there were no major differences between the 15-minute and the 30-minute writing blocks in terms of the positive impact that they had on mental and physical health.

事实证明，15 分钟和 30 分钟的写作时间段对身心健康的积极影响没有重大差异。

But for some people and their particular experience that they're writing about, 15 minutes is simply going to be too brief a time in order to capture the entire experience and as many thoughts and feelings about that experience as one would perhaps put down onto paper or type out if they had a full 30 minutes.

但对于某些人以及他们所写的特定经历来说，15 分钟对于捕捉整个经历以及对于该经历的许多想法和感受来说太短了，如果他们有整整​​ 30 分钟的时间，他们可能会写在纸上或打印出来。

So you can allow yourself 15 to 30 minutes and feel welcome to stop before the 30-minute period is over.

因此，您可以给自己 15 到 30 分钟的时间，并欢迎在 30 分钟结束之前停下来。

Or perhaps you're going to restrict yourself to 15 minutes and you're going to force yourself to get out as much as possible in that time.

或者你可能会将自己限制在 15 分钟内，并强迫自己在这段时间里尽可能多地出去。

It really doesn't matter, or so say the data.

其实这并不重要，至少数据是这么说的。

Okay, so before I continue to detail the specifics of this writing protocol, you've probably already noticed that what I'm describing is a very different form of journaling than, say, morning notes, which is a form of journaling that writers often use in order to, quote, unquote, "clear out the clutter."

好吧，在我继续详细介绍这个写作协议的细节之前，你可能已经注意到，我所描述的是一种与晨间笔记截然不同的日记形式，晨间笔记是作家经常用来引用、取消引用、“清除混乱”的一种日记形式。

This is a process of sitting down and writing down in stream of consciousness whatever's on your mind for the first 5 to 15, maybe even 30 minutes every morning as a way to sort of clear out your mental processes and get ready for the day, perhaps a day of other forms of writing or other activities entirely.

这是一个坐下来，在意识流中写下每天早上前 5 到 15 分钟，甚至可能是 30 分钟的想法的过程，以此来清理你的思维过程，为这一天做好准备，也许这一天完全是其他形式的写作或其他活动。

What I'm describing is also distinctly different from so-called gratitude journaling.

我所描述的也与所谓的感恩日记截然不同。

In fact, it's quite the opposite.

事实上，情况恰恰相反。

It's not writing about things that you're grateful for necessarily.

它并不是写你必然感激的事情。

It's writing about things that are extremely unfortunate that happened to you and that you have very charged negative emotions about.

它写的是发生在你身上的极其不幸的事情，以及你对此充满负面情绪的事情。

In addition, the form of journaling that we're talking about today is distinctly different from the form of journaling that I and many others have undertaken, perhaps not on a daily basis, but perhaps on a daily basis, where you essentially are writing out the contents of your daily life, a so-called diary.

另外，我们今天所说的写日记的形式，和我等很多人所写的日记形式有很大的不同，也许不是每天，但也许是每天，本质上是把日常生活的内容写下来，也就是所谓的日记。

And I mention that because I think many people do journal, and some do so on a consistent basis.

我提到这一点是因为我认为很多人都会写日记，而且有些人会持续这样做。

I would put myself into that category.

我会把自己归入这一类。

Although the last few years, I have not been journaling too much.

虽然最近几年，我并没有写太多日记。

I have Literally stacks and stacks of journals dating back to the early '90s.

我有成堆成堆的日记，可以追溯到 90 年代初。

I brought a few of them along today, and no, I'm not going to read them to any of you.

我今天带来了其中一些，不，我不会把它们读给你们任何人听。

In fact, when I was looking at these last night...

事实上，当我昨晚看这些的时候……

And by the way, so this is summer of 1997, so I would've been late in my undergraduate career.

顺便说一句，现在是 1997 年夏天，所以我的本科生涯就晚了。

This is fall of '96, 1992.

这是1992年96年的秋天。

Always done on the same composition notebook at that time, and always done by hand.

当时总是在同一个作文笔记本上完成，而且总是手工完成。

I'm surprised that my handwriting was as legible as it was.

我很惊讶我的笔迹竟然如此清晰。

It's gotten worse over the years.

这些年来情况变得更糟。

I don't know what neural process that reflects.

我不知道这反映了什么神经过程。

But in any event, in reading over these journal entries, it was clear to me that just as I had recalled, that each and every one of them was essentially an update about what was happening lately, what I was hoping for, some challenges, basically a diary of sorts.

但无论如何，在阅读这些日记条目时，我很清楚，正如我所记得的那样，它们中的每一篇本质上都是关于最近发生的事情、我的希望、一些挑战的更新，基本上是一本日记。

And these are kept in the second drawer of the second-- No, I'm just kidding.

这些东西都放在第二个抽屉里——不，我只是在开玩笑。

The idea for me is also that no one will ever read these besides me.

对我来说，除了我之外，没有人会读到这些。

It was quite an interesting exercise to go back and read those, and yeah, there were a few cringe moments.

回去阅读这些内容是一个非常有趣的练习，是的，有一些令人畏缩的时刻。

But there were also a few moments where I found myself smiling because, in certain ways, so little has changed between the person I was then and the person I am now.

但也有一些时刻，我发现自己微笑着，因为在某些方面，当时的我和现在的我几乎没有改变。

And fortunately, in so many ways, certain things have changed between the person I was then and the person I am now.

幸运的是，在很多方面，过去的我和现在的我之间的某些事情已经发生了变化。

Now, I mention all of that simply because I think the form of journaling that I've been doing for some years, this sort of autobiographical approach to daily entries or pseudo-daily entries, is far and away different than the type of journaling that we're talking about for sake of improving mental and physical health during today's episode.

现在，我提到所有这些只是因为我认为我多年来一直在做的日记形式，这种每日条目或伪每日条目的自传式方法，与我们在今天的节目中为了改善身心健康而谈论的日记类型截然不同。

Which is not to say that gratitude journaling or autobiographical daily entries, AKA diary-type journaling, is not useful.

这并不是说感恩日记或自传式日记（又称日记型日记）没有用​​。

In fact, there are data to support that gratitude journaling, in particular, can be very beneficial for both body and mind.

事实上，有数据支持感恩日记对身心都非常有益。

Everything from improving general states of happiness to reducing anxiety, improving relationships, and on and on.

从改善总体幸福感到减少焦虑、改善人际关系等等。

But to get back to the protocol that we're talking about today, you probably noticed that it is not a protocol that's likely to feel very good, at least not at first.

但回到我们今天讨论的协议，您可能会注意到它不是一个感觉非常好的协议，至少一开始不是。

And indeed, that's what the research shows, and this is something that you really need to be aware of, that when subjects are given this research assignment, during the assignment, they are often quite distraught.

事实上，这就是研究表明的，也是你真正需要意识到的事情，当受试者被分配这项研究任务时，在任务期间，他们通常会非常心烦意乱。

Oftentimes they cry.

他们常常哭泣。

Oftentimes they find themselves holding their breath in anxiety.

他们常常发现自己焦虑地屏住呼吸。

Oftentimes they'll finish that 15 to 30-minute writing block, and they'll feel as if they had run a mental marathon, and therefore the subjects were given a period of 5 to 15 minutes post-writing to settle down and transition back into their day.

通常，他们会完成 15 到 30 分钟的写作块，他们会感觉自己好像跑了一场心理马拉松，因此受试者在写作后有 5 到 15 分钟的时间来安定下来并过渡到他们的一天。

So I highly recommend that you incorporate that into your protocol as well.

因此，我强烈建议您将其也纳入您的协议中。

So if you're going to allow yourself, say, 20 minutes to write, you'll want to give yourself probably 10 minutes of quiet time to bring your composure back and reset yourself so that you can reenter daily living.

因此，如果您打算给自己 20 分钟的时间来写作，那么您可能需要给自己 10 分钟的安静时间来恢复镇定并重新调整自己，以便重新进入日常生活。

Because the writing that you're going to do for this particular protocol is designed to tap into very negative, if not the most negative experiences of your life.

因为你要为这个特定协议撰写的文章旨在挖掘你生活中非常消极的经历，即使不是最消极的经历。

And so that's something to be taken seriously, and it's an entirely unreasonable expectation that you could write about something as difficult as the most difficult experience in your life and then simply pivot and go back into everyday life right away.

所以这是一件需要认真对待的事情，如果你能写出像你一生中最困难的经历这样困难的事情，然后简单地转向并立即回到日常生活中，这是完全不合理的期望。

So you'll want to designate a time of day or night, perhaps, when you can do this writing and still allow yourself some time to settle down your autonomic system, return your breathing to normal, perhaps wash your face with some cool water, remind yourself that the rest of the day continues, that you're doing great.

因此，你可能需要指定白天或晚上的某个时间，当你可以写这篇文章的时候，仍然给自己一些时间来安定你的自主系统，让你的呼吸恢复正常，也许用一些凉水洗脸，提醒自己这一天剩下的时间还在继续，你做得很好。

In fact, you made it through this first installment of the journaling exercise.

事实上，您已经完成了日记练习的第一部分。

So you're probably starting to get the impression that this form of journaling that Pennebaker and colleagues really researched and pioneered the evolution of is quite different than other forms of journaling.

因此，您可能开始得到这样的印象：彭尼贝克及其同事真正研究和开创的这种日记形式与其他形式的日记有很大不同。

And in fact, it's very different.

事实上，这是非常不同的。

I've already told you that the idea is to sit down and write for 15 to 30 minutes, write continuously, write about something that really to you is one of the most, if not the most difficult experiences of your life.

我已经告诉过你，这个想法是坐下来写 15 到 30 分钟，连续写，写一些对你来说真正是你一生中最困难的经历之一的东西。

In addition to that, for this form of journaling to be most effective, that is to bring about the greatest positive shifts in mental and physical health, you're actually going to write about that exact same thing four times.

除此之外，为了使这种形式的日记最有效，即给身心健康带来最大的积极转变，您实际上需要将完全相同的事情写四遍。

Now, the way that that was initially researched by Pennebaker and others was to have the same person, of course, write about the same experience four times on four consecutive days for 15 to 30 minutes each.

Pennebaker 和其他人最初研究的方法是让同一个人连续四天写四次相同的经历，每次 15 到 30 分钟。

So students or people from the general population or veterans were literally coming into the laboratory and sitting down and writing about the most difficult experience of their life that they could recall for 15 to 30 minutes on one day, and then again on the next day, and then the next day, and the next day.

因此，学生、普通民众或退伍军人实际上走进实验室，坐下来，用 15 到 30 分钟的时间，写下他们一生中最困难的经历，这些经历是他们一天能回忆起来的，然后是第二天、第三天、第三天。

So much of the data on this particular journaling method reflects that four consecutive days of 15 to 30-minute writing bouts of the most difficult experience that you can recall.

关于这种特殊日记方法的大量数据反映了连续四天的 15 到 30 分钟的写作，记录了你能回忆起的最困难的经历。

However, there have been variations on this protocol such that people selected one day per week, and it doesn't even have to be the same day, like every Monday.

然而，这个协议有一些变化，比如人们每周选择一天，甚至不必是同一天，比如每个星期一。

It could be Monday of one week and then Wednesday of the next week and so on, such that you write only one day per week about the most difficult experience you can recall, and then you write about that same difficult experience one week later, and then again one week later, and then again one week later across the course of a month or any four-week period for that matter.

可以是一周的星期一，然后是下周的星期三，依此类推，这样你每周只写一天关于你能回忆起的最困难的经历，然后你一周后写同样的困难经历，然后一周后再写一次，然后一周后在一个月或任何四个星期的时间内再写一次。

Now, I don't know about you, but when I hear that, that I'm going to need to write about the most difficult experience of my entire life that I can recall for even 15 minutes, let alone 30 minutes, let alone two times, and here we're talking about four times, perhaps even on four consecutive days.

现在，我不知道你怎么想，但当我听到这个消息时，我需要写下我一生中最困难的经历，甚至是我能回忆起的15分钟，更不用说30分钟，更不用说两次了，而这里我们谈论的是四次，甚至可能是连续四天。

That actually speaks to some intensity, some demand.

这实际上说明了某种程度的强度和某种需求。

In fact, I find myself kind of leaning away from that experience a little bit.

事实上，我发现自己有点偏离了那种经历。

But as we'llTalk about later, that's exactly the point of this type of exercise, which is that we are harboring these stories, these experiences, and in some cases, partial recollections, in another case, detailed recollections of the difficult thing that happened to us, perhaps even the most difficult thing that happened to us.

但正如我们稍后会谈到的，这正是这种练习的意义所在，那就是我们怀有这些故事、这些经历，在某些情况下是部分回忆，在另一种情况下是对发生在我们身上的困难事情的详细回忆，甚至可能是发生在我们身上最困难的事情。

And those narratives exist in our nervous system.

这些叙述存在于我们的神经系统中。

These are not necessarily traumas, as we talked about before, although they can be traumas.

正如我们之前谈到的，这些不一定是创伤，尽管它们可能是创伤。

Now, we hear a lot about trauma, and these days people call all sorts of things trauma and traumatizing and say that they've been traumatized by this or traumatized by that.

现在，我们听到很多关于创伤的事情，现在人们称各种事情为创伤和创伤性的，并说他们受到了这个或那个的创伤。

There's actually a specific definition of trauma that was provided by Dr. Paul Conti, who as some of you know, is a medical doctor and psychiatrist.

实际上，保罗·康蒂博士提供了创伤的具体定义，正如你们中的一些人所知，他是一名医生和精神病学家。

He's been a guest on this podcast, first to talk about trauma.

他是这个播客的嘉宾，第一个谈论创伤。

He wrote an excellent book about trauma.

他写了一本关于创伤的优秀书。

I provide a link to that book in the show note captions, by the way.

顺便说一句，我在节目注释标题中提供了该书的链接。

And he and I did four episodes of the Huberman Lab podcast, a so-called guest series, specifically aimed at mental health, what it is, how to build mental health, specific protocols, and Dr. Paul Conti is really truly a world expert in trauma, and he defines trauma as any experience or experiences, plural, that modify our brain and neural circuitry, so it could be brain or body or both, such that we do not function as well emotionally, behaviorally, or cognitively going forward from that experience.

他和我做了四集胡伯曼实​​验室播客，一个所谓的客串系列，专门针对心理健康，它是什么，如何建立心理健康，具体的协议，保罗·孔蒂博士确实是创伤方面的世界专家，他将创伤定义为任何经历或经验，复数，改变我们的大脑和神经回路，所以它可能是大脑或身体或两者，这样我们就不会从该经历中获得情感，行为或认知方面的功能。

Okay, so not everything constitutes a trauma, but many things do.

好吧，并不是所有事情都会构成创伤，但很多事情都会构成创伤。

So applying that definition, I think it's fair to say that many, if not most, people have some form of trauma stored in their nervous system, and other people perhaps don't have such traumas, but everyone has had stressors.

因此，应用这个定义，我认为可以公平地说，许多人（如果不是大多数）的神经系统中储存着某种形式的创伤，而其他人可能没有这样的创伤，但每个人都曾有过压力源。

In fact, I think it's fair to say that everyone has had major stressors in their life, provided that they've lived at all.

事实上，我认为可以公平地说，每个人在生活中都曾面临过重大压力，只要他们还活着。

That's just part of life, unfortunately, or maybe fortunately.

不幸的是，或者幸运的是，这只是生活的一部分。

Maybe it makes us who we are in positive ways if we are able to transmute those negative experiences and stressors or traumas into particular forms of learning that allow us to do better.

如果我们能够将这些负面经历、压力或创伤转化为特定的学习形式，让我们做得更好，也许它会以积极的方式塑造我们。

Indeed, that's possible, and that was discussed with Paul Conti in that four-episode series on mental health.

事实上，这是可能的，并且在有关心理健康的四集系列节目中与保罗·康蒂讨论过这一点。

But the particular form of journaling that we're talking about today was really designed to have people focus on those difficult experiences, and then for four episodes total, yes, total.

但我们今天讨论的日记的特殊形式实际上是为了让人们关注那些困难的经历，然后总共四集，是的，总共。

There's no ongoing every week or it's not like having to seek out sunlight every morning and getting sunlight in your eyes or trying to get the best possible night's sleep at night like I'm always encouraging people to do.

没有每周都在进行的事情，也不像每天早上都必须寻找阳光，让阳光照射到眼睛里，或者像我总是鼓励人们那样努力在晚上获得尽可能好的睡眠。

This is really a short-term protocol, but it's one that is indeed very intense.

这确实是一项短期协议，但确实非常激烈。

Okay, so along those lines, that deliberately journaling about a particularly distressing experience or set of experiences is likely to bring some degree of sadness, anxiety, frustration, anger, perhaps other emotions as well.

好吧，按照这些思路，故意记录一次特别痛苦的经历或一系列经历可能会带来一定程度的悲伤、焦虑、沮丧、愤怒，也许还有其他情绪。

It's important that you know some of the data that have been collected about this journaling protocol.

了解已收集的有关此日志协议的一些数据非常重要。

One of the more important features of this protocol is that when people do it, they tend to bin out into two different groups, and these two groups have been described as low expressers and high expressers.

该协议更重要的特征之一是，当人们这样做时，他们倾向于分为两个不同的组，这两个组被描述为低表达者和高表达者。

Now, low expressers and high expressers have nothing to do with introversion and extroversion.

现在，低表达者和高表达者与内向和外向无关。

That's actually been looked at, and they have no relationship.

其实看过了，他们没有任何关系。

Okay?

好的？

So some people who are very talkative and very extroverted, they could be a low expresser.

因此，一些非常健谈且非常外向的人，他们可能是低表达者。

Somebody who's very introverted tends to only share when they really have something to say and maybe doesn't have a lot of interest in social interactions, or as some of you who heard the episode on relationships know, an actual introvert is somebody who really enjoys social interactions, but they are very sated.

非常内向的人往往只在真正有话要说并且可能对社交互动没有太大兴趣时才会分享，或者正如你们中一些听过人际关系剧集的人知道的那样，真正的内向者是真正喜欢社交互动的人，但他们非常满足。

They are very satisfied by less social interaction than are extroverts, okay?

他们对比外向者更少的社交互动感到非常满意，好吗？

If you want to learn more about that, check out the episode I did on relationships.

如果您想了解更多信息，请查看我在人际关系方面所做的一集。

But in any event, when people sit down to do this exercise, and when they consent to having their writing analyzed, and when they undergo a number of other different tests, it turns out there are two different groups that segment out.

但无论如何，当人们坐下来进行这项练习时，当他们同意对自己的写作进行分析时，当他们接受许多其他不同的测试时，结果会发现有两个不同的群体。

The first are these low expressers.

首先是这些低表达者。

The low expressers tend to use less descriptive language in their writing.

低表达者倾向于在写作中使用较少的描述性语言。

They tend to get less emotional during the first bout of writing, that first day of 15 to 30-minute writing.

在第一轮写作中，也就是第一天 15 到 30 分钟的写作中，他们往往不会那么情绪化。

Whereas the high expressers tend to be people that use a lot of negative language to describe their negative emotions about the negative experience.

而高表达者往往是使用大量负面语言来描述他们对负面经历的负面情绪的人。

So that means more negative descriptor words were used at higher frequency.

因此，这意味着更多负面描述词的使用频率更高。

These people, when they have their physiology measured, also tend to have higher amounts of distress and upset in the first bout of writing, that first 15 to 30-minute episode.

这些人在测量生理机能后，发现在第一轮写作（即前 15 至 30 分钟的情节）中往往会感到更多的痛苦和不安。

So we've got two different groups, the low expressers and the high expressers.

所以我们有两个不同的群体，低表达者和高表达者。

The low expressers on day one are sharing a bit less.

第一天低表达者的分享量要少一些。

They're expressing less on paper of their particular emotions that they can recall from that traumatic or very distressing event.

他们很少在纸上表达他们从创伤或非常痛苦的事件中回忆起的特定情绪。

And overall, based on physiological measures as well, so cortisol increases as well as skin conductance changes and heart rate and blood pressure, the lower expressers are effectively relatively more calm, less distressed as they write about this very stressful event in their lives relative to the high expressers who have higher blood pressure, higher heart rate.

总体而言，基于生理测量，皮质醇增加以及皮肤电导变化以及心率和血压，相对于血压较高、心率较高的高表达者，低表达者在写下生活中这一非常有压力的事件时实际上相对更平静，更少痛苦。

They tend to be the ones that cry more or hold their breath more or sob more, have higher levels of cortisol during that first round of writing.

他们往往是那些在第一轮写作期间哭得更多、屏住呼吸或哭泣更多、皮质醇水平更高的人。

Now, for the protocol to be effective, it doesn't matter if you're in the low expresser or high expresser group.

现在，为了使该方案有效，您属于低表达者还是高表达者组并不重要。

Here's what's interesting.

有趣的是。

I just mentioned that on day one, the low expressers are less distressed physiologically and psychologically as they write about this, for them, very distressful event.

我刚才提到，在第一天，低表达者在生理和心理上都没有那么痛苦，因为他们写下这对他们来说是非常痛苦的事件。

Whereas the high expressers are much more distressed, significantly more so, in fact, when these are measured in laboratory studies, on both mental and physical dimensions of stress.

而高表达者则更加痛苦，事实上，当在实验室研究中对压力的心理和身体维度进行测量时，情况要严重得多。

Now, that's on day one.

现在，这是第一天。

But then what's observed is an opposite pattern of progression such that the low expressers Become more and more distressed as the writing exercise continues from day two, three, and four.

但随后观察到的是相反的进展模式，随着写作练习从第二天、第三天和第四天开始，低表达者变得越来越痛苦。

Whereas the high expressers, these people that use a lot of language to communicate their distress and are experiencing a lot of physiological and emotional distress as they're writing on day one, their amount of distress from day one to two to three to four actually goes down more dramatically.

而高表达者，这些人在第一天写作时会使用大量语言来表达他们的痛苦，并经历很多生理和情感上的痛苦，但从第一天到第二天到第三天到第四天，他们的痛苦程度实际上会显着下降。

So you can expect that you fall into one or the other group.

因此，您可以预期自己会属于其中一个或另一组。

This was truly a binary distribution where people binned out into one or the other based on a number of different measurements.

这确实是一种二元分布，人们根据许多不同的测量结果将其分为一个或另一个。

But here's the good news.

但这里有个好消息。

Turns out it doesn't matter whether or not you're a low expresser or a high expresser.

事实证明，你是低表达者还是高表达者并不重要。

You want to use the form of writing that's most natural for you and that, for you, communicates what that negative experience was like and how it has affected you, and perhaps how it's affected others as well.

你想要使用对你来说最自然的写作形式，并且对你来说，传达那种负面经历是什么样的以及它如何影响你，也许它也如何影响他人。

The important thing to know is that both groups, both the low expressers and the high expressers, benefit from this journaling protocol such that three weeks later, and even three months later, and even years later, both groups are experiencing far less distress and baseline levels of stress than they did prior to embarking on the journaling protocol at the very beginning.

重要的是要知道，低表达者和高表达者这两个群体都受益于这种日记协议，因此三周后，甚至三个月后，甚至几年后，这两个群体所经历的痛苦和基线压力水平都比一开始​​开始日记协议之前要少得多。

Now, the reason I mention these two groups, the low expressers and the high expressers, is that it's a nontrivial detail of this writing protocol.

现在，我之所以提到这两组，即低表达者和高表达者，是因为这是该写作协议的一个重要细节。

Because some people are very familiar with communicating their emotions, both in writing and perhaps in speech as well.

因为有些人非常熟悉通过书面或言语来表达自己的情感。

And this actually has been looked at.

这实际上已经被研究过。

There's a wonderful study also by Pennebaker and colleagues, and I should mention that even though he studied this journaling protocol for a good number of years, his laboratory has evolved now to studying all sorts of things related to how the particular language usage patterns that people use in everyday speech as well as in their writing, how that reflects their underlying psychological tone and emotions.

Pennebaker 和他的同事也进行了一项精彩的研究，我应该提到，尽管他研究了这种日记协议很多年，但他的实验室现在已经发展到研究与人们在日常言语和写作中使用的特定语言使用模式如何相关的各种事物，以及如何反映他们潜在的心理基调和情绪。

But also, and I find this so interesting, how the particular words that we use in writing and speech actually shape, in a causal way, our emotional state.

而且，我发现这很有趣，我们在写作和演讲中使用的特定词语实际上是如何以因果方式塑造我们的情绪状态的。

So I'll talk a little bit about that later, but the important thing to focus on now is the results of this study entitled "Natural Emotion Vocabularies as Windows on Distress and Well-Being."

所以我稍后会稍微讨论一下，但现在要关注的重要事情是这项题为“自然情绪词汇作为痛苦和幸福的窗口”的研究结果。

And this, again, is a study that was done by Pennebaker and colleagues I've linked to in the show note captions.

这也是 Pennebaker 和他的同事所做的一项研究，我在节目说明文字中链接到了该研究。

And it essentially examines people's natural language usage patterns.

它本质上是检查人们的自然语言使用模式。

Now, what do I mean by natural and why is that important?

现在，我所说的自然是什么意思？为什么这很重要？

Well, there have been many, many studies of people's vocabulary and assessing whether or not people have more knowledge of negative words to describe negative emotions or positive emotions.

嗯，已经有很多很多关于人们词汇的研究，并评估人们是否有更多的负面词汇知识来描述负面情绪或正面情绪。

These studies are varying in their form, but generally consist of having people circle words they recognize or maybe writing out the definitions, too.

这些研究的形式各不相同，但通常包括让人们圈出他们认识的单词，或者也写出定义。

And it turns out that people that have more extensive knowledge of words that describe negative emotions themselves tend to have a lower affect or negative emotional state as compared to people who have more extensive knowledge of vocabulary words that pertain to positive emotions.

事实证明，与那些对与积极情绪相关的词汇有更广泛了解的人相比，对描述负面情绪的词汇有更广泛了解的人往往具有较低的情感或消极情绪状态。

So a crude example of what I just described is somebody that has fairly limited knowledge of words that describe positive emotional states.

因此，我刚才描述的一个粗略的例子是，某人对描述积极情绪状态的词语的了解相当有限。

So perhaps they recognize the word happy, they recognize the word ecstatic, they recognize the word joyful, but they have a fairly limited word set that pertains to positive emotions.

因此，也许他们认识到“快乐”这个词，他们认识到“欣喜若狂”这个词，他们认识到“快乐”这个词，但他们与积极情绪相关的词集相当有限。

Whereas by comparison, this is always relative within the same person, right?

而相比之下，这在同一个人内部总是相对的，对吗？

By comparison, the person knows four times more words that pertain to a negative emotional state.

相比之下，这个人知道的与消极情绪状态有关的单词多了四倍。

Okay?

好的？

In general, those people tend to be more depressive, tend to have higher levels of anxiety and so forth, as compared to somebody where the reverse pattern is true, where they have knowledge of far more words that pertain to positive emotional states as compared to negative emotional states.

一般来说，与相反模式的人相比，这些人往往更加抑郁，往往有更高程度的焦虑等等，与消极情绪状态相比，他们知道更多与积极情绪状态相关的单词。

Now, on the face of it, that result probably seems straightforward, right?

现在，从表面上看，这个结果可能看起来很简单，对吧？

People that have a lot of words to describe happiness are more happy.

拥有很多词语来形容幸福的人更加幸福。

People that have a lot of words to describe sadness and negative emotions are more sad.

用很多词语来描述悲伤和负面情绪的人更加悲伤。

But it didn't necessarily have to be that way, and it turns out that it's not always that way.

但事实并非一定如此，而且事实证明并非总是如此。

What do I mean by that?

我这么说是什么意思？

Well, the particular study that I've been describing here, this "Natural Emotion Vocabularies as Windows on Distress and Well-Being," is an important paper because it explored not the words that people have knowledge of, but the word patterns that people tend to use in their natural speech, either spoken or written.

嗯，我在这里描述的特别研究，“自然情感词汇作为痛苦和幸福的窗口”，是一篇重要的论文，因为它探讨的不是人们所知道的单词，而是人们在自然言语（无论是口语还是书面语）中倾向于使用的单词模式。

And what Pennebaker and others showed is that people that tend to use a lot of negative words tend to have more negative emotional states.

彭尼贝克和其他人发现，倾向于使用大量负面词汇的人往往有更多的负面情绪状态。

Whereas people that naturally tend to use words that describe positive emotional states have more positive emotions, and this related to both mental and physical metrics of negative emotions and positive emotions.

而自然地倾向于使用描述积极情绪状态的词语的人有更多的积极情绪，这与消极情绪和积极情绪的心理和身体指标有关。

So this is a significant result because what it says is that our knowledge of vocabulary words is, while interesting and perhaps important for other things, is not nearly as important as which particular words we use on a frequent basis.

所以这是一个重要的结果，因为它表明我们对词汇单词的了解虽然有趣，而且对于其他事情可能很重要，但并不像我们经常使用的特定单词那么重要。

And so whereas before I said, okay, if you're going to embark on this protocol of four writing sessions, 15 to 30 minutes each, that you should not monitor your writing, that you want to sit down, start writing, and just don't stop.

因此，之前我说过，好吧，如果你要开始这个由四次写作会议组成的协议，每次 15 到 30 分钟，你不应该监控你的写作，你要坐下来，开始写作，并且不要停止。

You don't want to pay attention to grammar or spelling or anything else.

你不想注意语法、拼写或其他任何事情。

And then after the fourth writing session, you don't look at what you've written for at least a week.

然后在第四次写作之后，你至少一周不会看你写的东西。

But then a week or more later, you go back and you read what you've written, paying careful attention to the number of words that you use that reflect a negative emotional or affect, as it's sometimes called, state in the first versus the second versus the third versus the fourth journal entry.

但一周或更长时间后，你回去阅读你所写的内容，仔细注意你使用的反映负面情绪或影响的单词数量，有时称为第一个、第二个、第三个、第四个日记条目中的状态。

Now, this might seem a little bit detailed and reductionist for a protocol that we would discuss on this podcast.

现在，对于我们将在这个播客中讨论的协议来说，这可能看起来有点详细和简化。

Here we're really talking about you doing your own data analysis of self.

在这里，我们真正谈论的是您自己进行的自我数据分析。

But if you think about it, a practice like this both can be very quick and highly informative.

但如果你仔细想想，这样的练习既可以非常快速，又可以提供丰富的信息。

So for instance, you can go back and simply circle all the words that at first blush to you appear to reflect a negative state, and put a square around all the words that just by your read seem to reflect a positive state, and then compare them across those four journal entries.

例如，你可以返回并简单地圈出所有乍一看似乎反映了消极状态的单词，并在所有你读到的似乎反映了积极状态的单词周围画一个正方形，然后将它们与这四个日记条目进行比较。

And of course, you can opt to not do any of this, but what people find, that is what was discovered in the research literature, is that on average, the patterns of language use from the first to the fourth entry shift dramatically, such that by the fourth entry, people, even though they're still writing about the same negative experience, are writing about that experience in a very different way.

当然，你可以选择不做任何这些，但人们发现，也就是在研究文献中发现的，平均而言，从第一个条目到第四个条目的语言使用模式发生了巨大的变化，这样到了第四个条目，人们即使仍然在写同样的负面经历，却以一种非常不同的方式来写这种经历。

Not only are they naturally using fewer negative words to describe their recollection and experience of that negative event, but the number of positive words is also increasing.

他们不仅自然地使用更少的负面词语来描述他们对该负面事件的回忆和经历，而且正面词语的数量也在增加。

Now, this is important because when Pennebaker and colleagues gave the instruction to people to do this protocol, they encouraged them to think about three things before they ever start writing.

现在，这很重要，因为当彭尼贝克和同事指示人们执行此协议时，他们鼓励他们在开始写作之前考虑三件事。

The first is, of course, to write about facts about that difficult experience.

当然，首先是写下有关这段艰难经历的事实。

I think that's sort of obvious that when people are going to recall a difficult experience, they're likely to write down facts about that experience.

我认为很明显，当人们要回忆一次困难的经历时，他们可能会写下有关该经历的事实。

The second thing that they want to remind them to include were emotions that they felt at the time of the experience, as well as emotions that they happen to feel now about that experience.

他们想要提醒他们的第二件事是他们在体验时感受到的情绪，以及他们现在碰巧感受到的情绪。

And third, that people include writing about any and all links that come to mind about the negative experience and things that may be happening today or plans for the future, people from the past, present, or future.

第三，人们写下任何和所有想到的关于负面经历和今天可能发生的事情或未来计划的链接，来自过去、现在或未来的人。

Really any link, no matter how distant it might seem or how random it might seem, to include that in the writing.

实际上，任何链接，无论它看起来多么遥远或看起来多么随机，都应将其包含在写作中。

Okay, so just to repeat the three things that they were instructed to include before they ever set their pens to paper or started typing out their negative experience.

好的，所以重复一下他们在写下笔或开始写出他们的负面经历之前被指示要包括的三件事。

First, facts about the hard experience.

首先，关于痛苦经历的事实。

So whatever they can recall that happened in that hard experience, or perhaps it was something that didn't happen, and that was why it was a hard experience, but facts related to that hard experience, facts of the hard experience.

因此，无论他们能回忆起在那次艰难经历中发生的事情，或者也许是没有发生的事情，这就是为什么这是一次艰难的经历，但与那段艰难经历相关的事实，那段艰难经历的事实。

Second, that they include writing about emotions felt at the time of the experience, as well as emotions felt now while writing about that prior experience.

其次，它们包括写下经历时感受到的情绪，以及写下先前经历时现在感受到的情绪。

And third, to include any writing about any links that spring to mind about the negative experience and anything that's happening now or perhaps happened in the past, or things that you have planned for the future.

第三，包括任何关于负面经历和现在发生的或过去可能发生的事情或你为未来计划的事情的任何链接的文章。

Now, that third category of links between the experience and other things may be direct and obvious.

现在，体验与其他事物之间的第三类联系可能是直接而明显的。

Maybe these are real aha moments where you go, "Oh my goodness, I realize now that what's been happening for the last six months is a direct mirror of what happened in that earlier traumatic or very stressful episode." Or perhaps the links are more opaque.

也许这些都是真正的顿悟时刻，你会说：“天哪，我现在意识到过去六个月发生的事情是早期创伤或压力很大的事件中发生的事情的直接镜像。”或者也许链接更加不透明。

Maybe the link is, "I don't know why, but I keep thinking about this one experience that I had, and I keep thinking about this one person, and I don't know how they're linked." That's fine.

也许这个联系是，“我不知道为什么，但我一直在思考我的这一经历，我一直在思考这个人，但我不知道他们是如何联系在一起的。”没关系。

Put those down on paper.

把它们写在纸上。

You could even draw a diagram.

你甚至可以画一个图表。

But I should mention it is important that you try to the best of your ability to write things out in complete sentences.

但我应该提到的是，重要的是你要尽力用完整的句子写出内容。

Again, they don't have to be perfect grammar or even pseudo-perfect grammar.

同样，它们不必是完美的语法，甚至不必是伪完美的语法。

The spelling can be off.

拼写可能会被关闭。

Your handwriting can be a mess, although if your handwriting's truly a mess, it might be hard to read later.

你的笔迹可能很乱，但如果你的笔迹真的很乱，以后可能很难阅读。

By the way, folks, my older sister always teases me that my handwriting is frozen in the third grade.

顺便说一句，各位，我姐姐总是取笑我，说我的字在三年级时就被冻结了。

I actually would like to show her my journal entries.

其实我很想给她看我的日记。

My handwriting was actually quite a bit better than it is now, which basically speaks to some degree of cognitive decline for me.

我的字实际上比现在好很多，这基本上说明了我的认知能力在某种程度上下降。

But in any case, the point is that this third category of establishing links between the prior negative experience and whatever else is an important component of the writing protocol.

但无论如何，要点是，在先前的负面经历和其他任何事情之间建立联系的第三类是写作协议的重要组成部分。

So whatever it takes to include those links, they are worth including.

因此，无论采取什么措施来包含这些链接，它们都是值得包含的。

Now, I want to reemphasize that even though I pointed to the positive health benefits of using more positive words in one's writing or speech, as opposed to negative words which tend to be associated with worse health outcomes, both in terms of physical and mental health, it is important and it's central to this writing protocol if you're going to get the positive consequences of it, that you're not monitoring the words that you're using too closely.

现在，我想再次强调，尽管我指出在写作或演讲中使用更多积极的词语对健康有积极的好处，而不是在身体和心理健康方面使用负面词语，这些词语往往会导致更糟糕的健康结果，但如果你想得到积极的结果，那么你就不会太密切地监控你所使用的词语，这一点很重要，也是这个写作协议的核心。

You're not trying to write this so someone else can see it.

您编写此内容并不是为了让其他人可以看到。

You're not trying to write the great American novel.

你并不是想写一部伟大的美国小说。

You're not writing your eulogy.

你不是在写悼词。

You're not writing your autobiography.

你不是在写你的自传。

You're really writing this for you.

你真的是为自己而写的。

I can't emphasize that enough.

我怎么强调都不为过。

You're doing this writing protocol so that you can work through something that is stressful or traumatic, that resides in your nervous system, and that is not serving you well.

你正在执行这个写作协议，这样你就可以解决那些存在于你的神经系统中、对你没有好处的有压力或创伤的事情。

Indeed, next we're going to talk about what happens when these narratives of our prior negative experiences are not worked through, that they have not been put either to speech or to pen to paper or typed out.

事实上，接下来我们要讨论的是，当我们之前的负面经历的这些叙述没有被解决时，如果它们没有被表达出来、写在纸上或打印出来，会发生什么。

And perhaps more importantly, we're going to talk about the incredibly positive benefits, both at the level of neural changes, so-called neuroplasticity, which is the literal rewiring of neural connections, as well as psychological benefits, reduced anxiety, improved mood, improved sleep, and improved immune function that are the consequence of doing this four bouts of 15 to 30-minute writing protocol.

也许更重要的是，我们将讨论令人难以置信的积极益处，无论是在神经变化层面，即所谓的神经可塑性，即神经连接的真正重新布线，以及心理益处，减少焦虑，改善情绪，改善睡眠和改善免疫功能，这是进行四轮 15 到 30 分钟的写作方案的结果。

Okay, so let's talk a little bit about the positive mental and in particular physical changes that occur in people that do this writing exercise.

好的，让我们来谈谈进行写作练习的人所发生的积极的心理变化，特别是身体上的变化。

I should mention that most of the studies, and again, more than 200 quality peer-reviewed studies of this protocol have been carried out and are still ongoing, not just in Pennebaker Laboratory, but in many, many other laboratories as well, reveal that the positive physical shifts that occur in people that complete these four bouts of writing in the way I described is both significant and long-lasting.

我应该提到，大多数研究，以及超过 200 项针对该协议的高质量同行评审研究已经进行，并且仍在进行中，不仅在彭尼贝克实验室，而且在许多其他实验室，这些研究表明，按照我所描述的方式完成这四轮写作的人所发生的积极的身体变化既重要又持久。

Now, of course, it is not the case that these four episodes of writing can completely cure major forms of depression or post-traumatic stress disorder, although they have been shown to benefit That is to reduce depressive symptoms and to reduce the symptoms of post-traumatic stress disorder considerably, but they shouldn't be considered complete therapeutics for those conditions.

当然，现在看来，这四篇文章并不能完全治愈抑郁症或创伤后应激障碍的主要形式，尽管它们已被证明可以有益于减轻抑郁症状和显着减轻创伤后应激障碍的症状，但它们不应被视为针对这些病症的完整疗法。

However, they have been shown to significantly improve many other health metrics, and I alluded to some of these at the beginning of today's episode.

然而，它们已被证明可以显着改善许多其他健康指标，我在今天节目的开头提到了其中的一些指标。

There have, for instance, been studies of this type of journaling protocol for people that have been suffering from chronic anxiety and insomnia, and indeed, they experience significant relief.

例如，有人对患有慢性焦虑和失眠的人进行了此类日记协议的研究，事实上，他们经历了显着的缓解。

As well, people who have suffered from arthritis, people who are going through cancer treatment, people who have lupus, which is an autoimmune disorder, report significantly improved symptoms, not necessarily cured from those conditions, but significantly improved symptoms as a consequence of doing this writing protocol.

同样，患有关节炎的人、正在接受癌症治疗的人、患有狼疮（一种自身免疫性疾病）的人报告说，症状得到了显着改善，不一定能从这些疾病中治愈，但由于执行了此写作方案，症状得到了显着改善。

In addition, and earlier I mentioned this, I realize, but I'll mention again, people suffering from fibromyalgia, which is a chronic pain condition that is, or can be very debilitating, has shown significant improvement in symptomology that has reduced chronic pain after they do these four bouts of writing in the way that I described.

此外，我之前提到过这一点，我意识到，但我会再次提到，患有纤维肌痛的人，这是一种慢性疼痛状况，会导致或可能使人非常虚弱，在按照我所描述的方式进行这四次写作后，症状得到了显着改善，减少了慢性疼痛。

And again, the relief from pain seems to be ongoing.

而且，疼痛的缓解似乎仍在持续。

Again, not a total cure of their symptoms.

同样，这并不能完全治愈他们的症状。

I don't want to provide false hope here or overblow the positive impact of this particular writing protocol, but nonetheless, statistically significant shifts that were pervasive over time.

我不想在这里提供虚假的希望，也不想夸大这个特定写作协议的积极影响，但尽管如此，随着时间的推移，统计学上的显着变化是普遍存在的。

In addition, people suffering from IBS or irritable bowel syndrome have achieved some significant degree of relief of their symptoms relative to people who also have irritable bowel syndrome but who do not do the exact same protocol that we're talking about today.

此外，与患有肠易激综合症但没有采取与我们今天讨论的完全相同的方案的人相比，患有肠易激综合症或肠易激综合症的人的症状得到了某种程度的显着缓解。

Now, of course, in all of these studies, we're not talking about people that simply do this writing protocol as compared to people that don't do the writing protocol.

当然，现在，在所有这些研究中，我们并不是在谈论仅执行此写作协议的人与不执行此写作协议的人之间的比较。

Pennebaker and others, of course, are excellent scientists, and so they provide adequate control conditions.

当然，彭尼贝克等人都是优秀的科学家，因此他们提供了足够的控制条件。

The control conditions, in most cases, were to have people also do 15 to 30 minutes of writing, but to do journaling in the more conventional manner of autobiographical report of what they've been up to lately or what they plan to do.

在大多数情况下，控制条件是让人们也进行 15 到 30 分钟的写作，但以更传统的自传式报告方式写日记，记录他们最近在做什么或计划做什么。

In fact, very much like my journal entries from college and in the years subsequent to that.

事实上，这很像我大学时期和随后几年的日记。

So it's important to understand that what we're talking about today is a journaling protocol, which seems somewhat conventional, but the exact protocol is highly unusual, as we've been talking about throughout today's episode.

因此，重要的是要了解我们今天讨论的是日志协议，这似乎有些传统，但确切的协议非常不寻常，正如我们在今天的整集中讨论的那样。

And in addition, all of the data that we're discussing in terms of positive mental and physical effects are data that were established relative, that is, are statistically significant as compared to a control group that also wrote for an equivalent amount of time, tended to write out an equivalent number of words on average, and yet were writing about something quite different than the people that were in the so-called experimental group.

此外，我们讨论的所有关于积极的精神和身体影响的数据都是相对确定的数据，也就是说，与对照组相比具有统计显着性，对照组也写作了相同的时间，平均写出相同数量的单词，但所写的内容与所谓的实验组中的人完全不同。

So it's important to keep in mind that we're not simply talking about phenomenology here.

因此，重要的是要记住，我们在这里谈论的不仅仅是现象学。

We're talking about scientific studies where very specific measurements of the experimental group, that is the group that did this particular form of writing about something very distressing or even traumatic four times, 15 to 30 minutes per time, relative to a control group that did nearly the equivalent form of mechanical processes of writing, but that the specific emotional content related to that writing was the major variable that differed.

我们谈论的是科学研究，其中对实验组进行了非常具体的测量，即对非常痛苦甚至创伤的事情进行四次这种特殊形式的写作，每次 15 到 30 分钟的小组，相对于进行几乎相同形式的机械写作过程的对照组，但与该写作相关的特定情感内容是不同的主要变量。

In fact, that is one particular strength of the protocol we're describing today, that if you think about it, would be very hard to do in a study, say, of physical exercise where you have people perhaps run on a treadmill, getting their heart rate up to 85% of their maximum heart rate for 30 minutes, five days a week.

事实上，这是我们今天描述的协议的一个特殊优势，如果你仔细想想，在一项体育锻炼的研究中，这是很难做到的，比如说，让人们在跑步机上跑步，让他们的心率达到最大心率的 85%，每周 5 天，持续 30 分钟。

You would expect that that group, compared to a group that did nothing, would experience significantly greater shifts in positive health metrics like lower blood pressure, certainly not during the exercise bout.

你可能会期望，与什么都不做的一组相比，该组在积极的健康指标（如血压降低）方面会经历显着更大的变化，当然不是在锻炼期间。

During the exercise bout, you can bet that their blood pressure and heart rate went way up but that, of course, afterwards, they would adapt to that exercise by having a resting heart rate that was lower than any group that did nothing or that walked on a treadmill.

在锻炼过程中，你可以打赌他们的血压和心率会大幅上升，但当然，之后他们会通过静息心率低于任何不做任何事情或在跑步机上行走的组来适应该锻炼。

But it's actually very hard to think about a control group that would provide real equivalence of time spent and effort spent but that would differ only on one variable, which would be heart rate.

但实际上很难想象一个对照组能够提供所花费的时间和所花费的精力的真正等价性，但仅在一个变量上有所不同，即心率。

You could probably come up with something, but it'd be very difficult to do.

你或许可以想出一些办法，但是很难做到。

Whereas in the studies that we're talking about during today's episode, essentially everything was the same, right?

而在我们今天讨论的研究中，基本上一切都是一样的，对吧？

People are still writing, they're still sitting, they're still doing it for the same amount of time.

人们仍然在写作，他们仍然坐着，他们仍然在同样的时间里这样做。

It's simply that the content of the writing is different at the level of the emotional tone of the subject that they're writing about, which I find both exciting and personally quite motivating to do the sort of protocol that I've described today because it leads to such dramatic shifts in health across a huge range of dimensions, both in people suffering from certain conditions and people who are not suffering from certain conditions.

只是写作的内容在他们所写的主题的情感基调层面上有所不同，我觉得这既令人兴奋，又对我个人很有动力去做我今天描述的那种协议，因为它会导致健康在各个方面发生巨大的变化，无论是在患有某些疾病的人还是没有患有某些疾病的人中。

And then the question becomes why?

然后问题就变成了为什么？

What is actually happening at a physiological level that can explain all of these incredible psychological and physical positive shifts that occur?

在生理层面上到底发生了什么，可以解释所有这些令人难以置信的心理和身体积极变化？

Okay, so as with any protocol that's shown in many studies, again, here more than 200 peer-reviewed studies, to have positive effects on mental health or physical health, you can imagine that there's going to be a constellation of positive effects that occur that can explain, say, the improvement in autoimmune conditions or the improvement in anxiety, that is a reduction in anxiety, or the improvement in sleep patterns.

好吧，就像许多研究中显示的任何方案一样，这里有 200 多项同行评审的研究，为了对心理健康或身体健康产生积极影响，你可以想象，将会出现一系列积极的影响，可以解释，比如说，自身免疫状况的改善或焦虑的改善，即焦虑的减少，或睡眠模式的改善。

It's not going to be just one thing.

这不会只是一件事。

However, there are some general categories of physiological changes that have been observed in people that do the particular protocol we're talking about today that I think can explain a great number of the mental and physical shifts that occur.

然而，在执行我们今天讨论的特定方案的人们中观察到了一些一般类别的生理变化，我认为这些变化可以解释所发生的大量精神和身体变化。

Now, one of the more important studies in this area that's been published, and here again, this is a paper by James Pennebaker, but I don't want to give the impression that he's the only person or the only laboratory that's looked at this particular writing protocol.

现在，该领域一项更重要的研究已经发表，这是 James Pennebaker 的一篇论文，但我不想给人留下这样的印象：他是唯一一个研究这个特定写作协议的人或唯一的实验室。

Many others have as well, and I'll provide links to some of those in the show note captions.

许多其他人也有，我将在节目注释标题中提供其中一些的链接。

But this particular study I'm about to describe explored how the disclosure of traumas or the writing out of very stressful experiences can impact immune function at the level of specific cell types of our immune system that are challenged in a way that mimics the sort of challenge we would experience if we were to be exposed to a bacteria or virus.

但我即将描述的这项特殊研究探讨了披露创伤或写出非常紧张的经历如何影响我们免疫系统特定细胞类型水平的免疫功能，这些细胞类型受到的挑战类似于我们接触细菌或病毒时会经历的那种挑战。

Now, without getting into a detailed lecture about immunology, and by the way, I did an entire episode of the Huberman Lab podcast about immune function in the brain some years ago, and you can find that by going to hubermanlab.com.

现在，没有详细介绍免疫学，顺便说一句，几年前我制作了一整集关于大脑免疫功能的 Huberman Lab 播客，您可以通过访问 hubermanlab.com 找到它。

Just put immune system into the search function.

只需将免疫系统放入搜索功能即可。

It will take you to that episode and to any timestamps of other episodes where I touch on the immune system or protocols related to immune brain function.

它将带您到该情节以及我触及免疫系统或与免疫脑功能相关的协议的其他情节的任何时间戳。

In the meantime, this particular study is very interesting and worth highlighting because what they did was to essentially have people do the exact same protocol that we've been describing throughout today's episode.

与此同时，这项特殊的研究非常有趣，值得强调，因为他们所做的基本上是让人们执行我们在今天的节目中描述的完全相同的方案。

But they also included blood draws from the subjects in those experiments, and they collected that blood from subjects both before and after the writing episodes.

但他们还在这些实验中从受试者身上抽取了血液，并且在写作之前和之后从受试者身上采集了血液。

In fact, they took the blood at 15 weeks prior to the study and again six weeks into the study.

事实上，他们在研究前 15 周采集了血液，并在研究后 6 周再次采集了血液。

Okay?

好的？

Now, keep in mind that people were completing the writing exercise over the course of at a maximum four weeks, but they were still monitoring these subjects in terms of their psychological and physical health after the final writing exercise.

现在，请记住，人们最多在四个星期的时间内完成写作练习，但在最终写作练习后，他们仍在监测这些受试者的心理和身体健康状况。

That was a key component of essentially all of the studies of this particular protocol.

这是该特定方案的所有研究的关键组成部分。

They'd assess people before they did the writing assignment, they assessed people during the writing assignment, and they assessed people often long after the writing assignment was completed, even years after the writing assignment was completed.

他们会在完成写作作业之前对人们进行评估，在写作作业期间对人们进行评估，并且他们通常在写作作业完成很久之后甚至在写作作业完成几年后对人们进行评估。

So in this particular experiment, they're drawing blood 15 weeks before and six weeks into the study.

因此，在这个特殊的实验中，他们在研究前 15 周和研究后 6 周进行抽血。

Six weeks into the study is after all of the writing, that is the four bouts of writing, have been completed.

研究六周后，所有的写作，即四轮写作，都已经完成。

They also divided subjects in this study into people that were so-called high disclosers, so these are people that revealed a lot about their particular traumatic or stressful episode in their writing, and people that were low disclosers.

他们还将这项研究中的受试者分为所谓的高披露者和低披露者，这些人在写作中透露了很多关于他们特定的创伤或压力事件的信息。

They also included a control group, and the control group was essentially as I described before.

他们还包括一个对照组，对照组基本上如我之前所描述的那样。

It consisted of people that also were doing journaling for the equivalent amount of time as people that were in the experimental group, but that were not writing about a traumatic or stressful experience.

其中包括与实验组中的人写日记的时间相同的人，但他们写的并不是创伤或压力经历。

Now, the basic takeaway of this study is as follows.

现在，这项研究的基本要点如下。

They take the blood.

他们抽取血液。

They are able to isolate from the blood something called T lymphocytes.

他们能够从血液中分离出一种称为 T 淋巴细胞的物质。

T lymphocytes are an essential component of your immune system.

T 淋巴细胞是免疫系统的重要组成部分。

These are cells that many people describe as white blood cells.

这些细胞被许多人称为白细胞。

They are manufactured in the bone marrow, which I still find amazing, right?

它们是在骨髓中制造的，我仍然觉得很神奇，对吧？

We think of bone as just these hard components of our body and our skeleton that allow us to be upright and to be rigid and to move about and not be jelly-like.

我们认为骨骼就是我们身体和骨骼的坚硬组成部分，它们使我们能够直立、僵硬、活动，而不是像果冻一样。

But indeed, in the center of the bone is marrow, and the marrow itself is performing an important physiological role, many roles in fact, one of which is to create these T lymphocytes or white blood cells.

但事实上，骨头的中心是骨髓，骨髓本身发挥着重要的生理作用，实际上有很多作用，其中之一就是产生这些T淋巴细胞或白细胞。

They actually are born of the bone marrow, but then they mature in a structure called the thymus.

它们实际上是从骨髓中诞生的，但随后它们在称为胸腺的结构中成熟。

The thymus is an organ that sits essentially behind your sternum, and it's there that the cells that originate from the bone marrow are matured into what are effectively white blood cells, which are essentially cells that go out and combat infections, bacterial infections, viral infections, even fungal infections.

胸腺是一个基本上位于胸骨后面的器官，来自骨髓的细胞在那里成熟为有效的白细胞，这些细胞本质上是抵抗感染、细菌感染、病毒感染甚至真菌感染的细胞。

Now, they combat infection not alone, but in collaboration with other immune cell types that you can learn about, again, in that episode that I did about the immune system and the nervous system if you choose to go listen to it.

现在，它们不仅单独对抗感染，而且还与其他免疫细胞类型合作，如果你选择去听的话，你可以在我关于免疫系统和神经系统的那一集中再次了解它们。

And even if you don't, here's what you need to know about this study.

即使您不知道，以下也是您需要了解的有关这项研究的信息。

In this study, what they found is that when they took the blood from these subjects, isolated those T lymphocytes, and then challenged those T lymphocytes with something that mimics an infection, and they did that with something called Concanavalin A.

在这项研究中，他们发现，当他们从这些受试者身上采集血液时，分离出那些 T 淋巴细胞，然后用模拟感染的东西攻击这些 T 淋巴细胞，他们用一种叫做刀豆球蛋白 A 的东西做到了这一点。

Concanavalin A is what's considered a mitogen.

刀豆球蛋白 A 被认为是有丝分裂原。

It's something that activates T lymphocytes and it activates what are called natural killer cells.

它可以激活 T 淋巴细胞，并激活所谓的自然杀伤细胞。

Now, that's a lot of detail for sake of this episode.

现在，对于这一集来说，这是很多细节。

Basically, what the Concanavalin A is doing is it's mimicking an infection, but in this particular study, this is all being done on T lymphocytes that have been collected.

基本上，伴刀豆球蛋白 A 的作用是模拟感染，但在这项特定的研究中，这一切都是在收集的 T 淋巴细胞上完成的。

They're put into a dish, and then they're exposed to different concentrations, going from low to medium to high of that Concanavalin A, mimicking a low-grade, moderate, or severe infection.

它们被放入培养皿中，然后暴露于不同浓度的伴刀豆球蛋白 A 中，从低到中再到高，模拟低度、中度或重度感染。

And what they observed in this study is remarkable.

他们在这项研究中观察到的现象是值得注意的。

To me, this just still blows my mind.

对我来说，这仍然让我震惊。

People that did this four bouts of writing protocol experienced a greater degree of T lymphocyte activation from the Concanavalin mitogen challenge, which mimics infection, than did people who wrote about something that wasn't stressful or traumatic.

与那些写没有压力或创伤性内容的人相比，完成这四轮写作方案的人在伴刀豆球蛋白有丝分裂原挑战（模拟感染）中经历了更大程度的 T 淋巴细胞激活。

Now, that itself is pretty striking if you think about it.

现在，如果你仔细想想，这本身就非常引人注目。

We're talking about a writing exercise that generates an emotional state versus a writing exercise that does not produce as negative or intense an emotional state, and we're talking about a significant effect on the immune system or the mobilization of immune cells in response to an immune challenge.

我们谈论的是产生情绪状态的写作练习与不会产生消极或强烈情绪状态的写作练习，我们谈论的是对免疫系统或免疫细胞动员以应对免疫挑战的显着影响。

In addition to that, however, they observed that high disclosers, that is people that really poured themselves into this writing protocol, experienced a greater degree of immune activation, that is a fighting off response to this mitogen, Concanavalin A, than did people that were low disclosers.

然而除此之外，他们还观察到，与低披露者相比，高披露者，即真正全身心投入到该写作方案中的人，经历了更大程度的免疫激活，即对抗这种有丝分裂原伴刀豆球蛋白 A 的反应。

So this really speaks to the fact that the intensity of the emotional state during the writing exercise is having a significant impact on the immune system at the level of something as basic and yet as powerful as how much deployment of immune response there is to an infection.

因此，这确实说明了这样一个事实：写作练习期间情绪状态的强度对免疫系统产生了重大影响，其影响程度与对感染的免疫反应的部署程度一样基本，但也同样强大。

Now, the field of so-called psychoneuroimmunology has been around for more than 30 years.

现在，所谓的心理神经免疫学领域已经存在了 30 多年。

In fact, if you don't apply standard definitions to that field, it's been around for thousands of years.

事实上，如果你不将标准定义应用于该领域，它已经存在了数千年。

But really, it's only in the last 10 years or so that scientists and physicians, at least standard scientists and physicians, have started to really adopt the understanding and really apply to their studies and their clinical practice This firm idea that the body and mind are linked in this way, that emotions can really shape our physical responses, and that physical responses also can shape, of course, our mental responses.

但实际上，直到最近10年左右，科学家和医生，至少是标准的科学家和医生，才开始真正采用这种理解，并真正应用于他们的研究和临床实践。这种坚定的想法是，身体和心灵以这种方式联系在一起，情绪确实可以塑造我们的身体反应，当然，身体反应也可以塑造我们的心理反应。

Now, I'm not trying to be disparaging at all of traditional science or medicine, it's just that until recently, these fields have existed more or less as silos.

现在，我并不是想贬低传统科学或医学，只是直到最近，这些领域或多或少都以孤岛的形式存在。

People that studied bodily organs versus people that studied the brain, people that studied emotions and psychology versus people that studied the immune system.

研究身体器官的人与研究大脑的人，研究情绪和心理学的人与研究免疫系统的人。

And there's been some crossover, but by and large, it's been very siloed.

虽然存在一些交叉，但总的来说，它是非常孤立的。

Now, I mention this because if you look into the history of why James Pennebaker and colleagues started exploring this particular pattern of journaling, it actually relates to his own personal experience.

现在，我提到这一点是因为如果你了解詹姆斯·彭尼贝克和同事开始探索这种特殊日记模式的历史，它实际上与他自己的个人经历有关。

And I don't want to spend too much time on this, but it's worth mentioning that Pennebaker has actually spoken about and written about in, by the way, an excellent book that I've linked to in the show note captions, where he talks about his experience in suffering pretty severely from asthma as a child, and that that asthma was seasonal.

我不想在这上面花太多时间，但值得一提的是，顺便说一下，彭尼贝克实际上在一本优秀的书中谈到和写过这本书，我在节目说明文字中链接到了这本书，他在书中谈到了他小时候患上严重哮喘的经历，而且哮喘是季节性的。

And yet, at some point later in his life, because he had certain relatives visiting him in his new home location, that his asthma would come and go as a consequence of interacting with certain members of his family, independent of season.

然而，在他生命后期的某个时刻，因为他有某些亲戚来他的新家探望他，他的哮喘会因为与他的某些家庭成员互动而出现或消失，而与季节无关。

And basically what he deduced from his own personal experience is that there must be some link between our emotions, either negative or positive, and our immune system, or other physical ailments, or thriving in the physical sense.

基本上，他从自己的个人经历中推断出，我们的情绪（无论是消极的还是积极的）与我们的免疫系统或其他身体疾病或身体意义上的繁荣之间必定存在某种联系。

Now, he certainly wasn't the first one to come up with that hypothesis, but indeed he was one of the first to really start exploring a protocol within the laboratory, an experimental protocol, that could really tap into high degrees of emotionality, in this case negative emotions, and the consequence of that on physical health outcomes.

现在，他当然不是第一个提出这个假设的人，但事实上，他是第一个真正开始在实验室内探索一种协议的人，一种实验协议，它可以真正利用高度的情绪，在这种情况下是负面情绪，以及它对身体健康结果的影响。

And this study that I mentioned is but one of those examples.

我提到的这项研究只是其中之一。

And in that way, he's truly a pioneer in thinking about, quote-unquote, "psychoneuroimmunology," but couching it not in the direction that most people do, which is, for instance, there have been lots of studies where people have said, okay, in people that are chronically stressed, which includes, of course, psychological stress, what are the effects on the nervous system, the immune system, et cetera?

这样一来，他确实是思考“心理神经免疫学”的先驱，但它的表述方式与大多数人的方向不同，例如，有很多研究表明，好吧，对于长期承受压力的人来说，其中当然包括心理压力，对神经系统、免疫系统等有何影响？

And as you can imagine, in general, people who are more stressed over long periods of time had worse physical outcomes, and people who were less stressed had better physical outcomes.

正如你可以想象的那样，一般来说，长期承受较大压力的人身体状况较差，而压力较小的人身体状况较好。

But the protocol that we're talking about today is quite a bit different.

但我们今天讨论的协议有很大不同。

So if you step back and think about it, it's a little counterintuitive.

所以如果你退后一步想一想，这有点违反直觉。

What Pennebaker essentially did was to have people deliberately induce a negative experience, and yet they're seeing positive physical health outcomes, or in this case, positive effects on immune system function.

彭尼贝克本质上所做的是让人们故意诱发负面经历，但他们却看到了积极的身体健康结果，或者在这种情况下，对免疫系统功能的积极影响。

So that leads to the question of what's really happening during and after these four episodes of writing, and that's where things get especially interesting as it relates to the nervous system and to neuroplasticity, or the nervous system's ability to rewire itself in response to experience.

因此，这就引出了一个问题：在这四集写作期间和之后到底发生了什么，这就是事情变得特别有趣的地方，因为它与神经系统和神经可塑性有关，或者神经系统根据经验重新连接自身的能力。

So that's what we're going to talk about next.

这就是我们接下来要讨论的内容。

Okay, so what's happening at a mechanistic level that allows people who do these four bouts of writing about something traumatic or stressful to achieve these long-lasting positive shifts in mental and physical health?

好吧，那么在机械层面上发生了什么，让那些写了这四次有关创伤或压力的事情的人能够在心理和身体健康方面实现这些持久的积极转变呢？

Now, there could be any number of different changes occurring at the level of the mind or body, but what we're talking about here is trying to find the pivotal one, or sometimes referred to as the linchpin mechanism.

现在，精神或身体层面可能会发生许多不同的变化，但我们在这里讨论的是试图找到关键的变化，有时也称为关键机制。

That when one taps into that mechanism, it wicks out into all these different systems of the brain and body and provides all of these different positive benefits.

当人们利用这一机制时，它会渗透到大脑和身体的所有不同系统中，并提供所有这些不同的积极益处。

Now, in researching this episode, I thought long and hard about this and came up with a short list of ideas.

现在，在研究这一集时，我对此进行了长时间的思考，并提出了一个简短的想法清单。

And as is always the case, people who have worked in this area on this particular protocol, and protocols similar to it in the field of psychology and neuroscience, have also generated their own short list, and those short lists converge at the level of one particular mechanism that is worth describing.

与往常一样，在这一特定协议以及心理学和神经科学领域中类似协议的领域工作的人们也生成了自己的短名单，并且这些短名单集中在一个值得描述的特定机制的层面上。

And that one particular mechanism is anchored around the concept of neuroplasticity.

这种特殊的机制是以神经可塑性的概念为基础的。

That is, our nervous system's ability to change in response to experience.

也就是说，我们的神经系统根据经验而改变的能力。

And if you've heard me talk about neuroplasticity before, neuroplasticity in childhood occurs through rather passive experience of any sorts of events.

如果你以前听过我谈论过神经可塑性，那么童年时期的神经可塑性是通过对任何类型事件的相当被动的经历而发生的。

In fact, one of the hallmarks of childhood is that just the mere exposure to an experience reshapes the brain, not necessarily permanently, but often in a way that is very long-lasting.

事实上，童年的标志之一是，仅仅接触某种经历就会重塑大脑，这种重塑不一定是永久性的，但通常是以一种非常持久的方式。

Now, that's a feature of childhood, because if you think about what the nervous system is really designed to do for us, it's of course what allows us to move our limbs, it's what allows us to have a heart rate that goes in the background without us having to think about it, so-called autonomic functions.

现在，这是童年的一个特征，因为如果你想想神经系统的真正目的是为我们做什么，它当然可以让我们移动我们的四肢，它可以让我们在后台有一个心率，而我们不必考虑它，即所谓的自主功能。

It's what keeps us breathing without us having to think about it, and on and on.

它让我们无需思考就能继续呼吸。

But one of the main functions of the nervous system is to be a predictive machine, to make good guesses about what's to come next.

但神经系统的主要功能之一是成为预测机器，对接下来发生的事情做出很好的猜测。

And one of the ways to make really good guesses about what's to come next is to take a certain period of life that we call childhood, superimpose on that period of life, that childhood, what we call a critical period or sensitive period, during which our experiences create a sort of map within us that allow us to predict, okay, well, if this person's in the room later, well then that's likely to happen.

对接下来会发生什么做出真正好的猜测的方法之一就是把我们称之为童年的某个生命时期叠加到那个生命时期，即童年，我们称之为关键时期或敏感时期，在此期间，我们的经历在我们内部创建了一种地图，使我们能够预测，好吧，好吧，如果这个人稍后在房间里，那么这很可能会发生。

Or if those people are in the room, any number of different things could happen, but of one particular category of experience as opposed to another.

或者，如果这些人在房间里，可能会发生许多不同的事情，但属于一种特定类别的体验，而不是另一种体验。

That's really what your nervous system does.

这确实是你的神经系统所做的事情。

It becomes a prediction machine, and it becomes a prediction machine by drawing strong correlations between emotional states, your physical surroundings, your perception of who's there, what's there, what happened just prior to something, and how it made you feel later.

它变成了一台预测机器，它通过在情绪状态、你的物理环境、你对谁在那儿、那儿有什么、某件事之前发生的事情以及它给你带来的感觉之间的强烈关联而成为一台预测机器。

So when we talk about recounting a stressful or traumatic event, if you recall, there were three components to it.

因此，当我们谈论讲述压力或创伤事件时，如果您还记得的话，它包含三个组成部分。

It involved facts about that experience.

它涉及有关该经历的事实。

So literally, who was there what happened as to the best of our recollection.

从字面上看，根据我们的记忆，谁在那儿发生了什么事。

If you recall the second thing, it's also about recounting how that experience made you feel at the time and how it makes you feel now.

如果你还记得第二件事，它也是关于讲述那次经历当时给你带来的感受以及现在给你带来的感受。

And then if you recall, the third thing that's critical to include, it's about any links or associations between what happened and really anything at all.

然后，如果你还记得的话，第三件至关重要的事情就是所发生的事情与任何事情之间的任何联系或关联。

So if you think about it, all three of those things in that list are really about tapping into your neural map or your schema as it's sometimes called, or your internal representation, both conscious and unconscious, of what happened during that stressful or traumatic event.

因此，如果你仔细想想，该列表中的所有三件事实际上都是关于利用你的神经图或你的图式（有时被称为），或者你的内部表征，无论是有意识的还是无意识的，在压力或创伤事件期间发生的事情。

Now, a hallmark feature of traumas as well as a hallmark feature of addictions, as well as a hallmark feature of compulsive behaviors or negative habitual behaviors and negative habitual states like chronic stress, anxiety, the sorts of things that trigger insomnia, the sorts of states of body that trigger immune compromise and give us autoimmune or other types of immune system challenges, are that a certain component of our nervous system and our brain in particular, are less engaged than they normally would be in the healthy condition.

现在，创伤的标志性特征以及成瘾的标志性特征，以及强迫行为或消极习惯性行为和消极习惯性状态（如慢性压力、焦虑、引发失眠的各种因素、引发免疫妥协并给我们带来自身免疫或其他类型的免疫系统挑战的身体状态）的标志性特征是，我们的神经系统，特别是我们的大脑的某些组成部分比健康状态下的参与程度要低。

Now, I want to be clear that in any one of these conditions, whether or not it's irritable bowel syndrome or it's fibromyalgia or it's chronic anxiety or depression, there are many different brain centers and networks, that is stations within the nervous system of the brain and body that are involved.

现在，我想澄清的是，在任何一种情况下，无论是肠易激综合症还是纤维肌痛，还是慢性焦虑或抑郁，都有许多不同的大脑中心和网络，即大脑和身体神经系统内的站点参与其中。

I really want to emphasize this.

我真的想强调这一点。

There's no one location in the brain, for instance, for fear or anxiety.

例如，大脑中没有一个位置代表恐惧或焦虑。

It's always a network phenomenon, the relative activation of different brain centers at different times and so on.

它始终是一种网络现象，不同大脑中心在不同时间的相对激活等等。

But with respect to thinking about traumas and stressful experiences, we have to ask ourselves what is it about the emotional states and all the mapping, the representation around those emotional experiences that would somehow impact our immune system, like our thymus of all things, or our bone marrow?

但在思考创伤和压力经历时，我们必须问自己，情绪状态和所有映射、围绕这些情绪体验的表征是什么，这些情绪体验会以某种方式影响我们的免疫系统，比如我们的胸腺，或者我们的骨髓？

Or conversely, what would it be about a stressful experience that would impact our heart rate that would somehow then also change our brain?

或者相反，如果一次有压力的经历会影响我们的心率，从而以某种方式改变我们的大脑，那么会是什么样子呢？

So the mechanism that seems to be a sort of smoking gun of sorts, that is the mechanism that really does seem to be at least one of those linchpin mechanisms, is that when we experience very stressful or traumatic experiences, our prefrontal cortex, the neural real estate that's just behind our forehead, which has several different subdivisions, in fact, is reduced in its overall levels of activity.

因此，这个机制似乎是一种确凿无疑的机制，这种机制确实似乎至少是这些关键机制中的一个，即当我们经历非常有压力或创伤的经历时，我们的前额皮质，即位于我们前额后面的神经区域，实际上有几个不同的细分，其整体活动水平会降低。

And other areas of the brain that sometimes are referred to as the limbic areas of the brain, although if we were to be more accurate than that, the modern neuroscience really refers to these as subcortical structures.

大脑的其他区域有时被称为大脑的边缘区域，尽管如果我们比这更准确的话，现代神经科学实际上将这些区域称为皮层下结构。

They aren't necessarily limbic structures per se, although they can include components of the limbic system.

它们本身不一定是边缘结构，尽管它们可以包括边缘系统的组成部分。

So they can include things like the hypothalamus, so this dense collection of neurons that resides over the roof of your mouth that's involved in things like aggression or temperature regulation, sleep-wake cycles, and so on, as well as structures that perhaps you've heard more about, such as the amygdala, which is involved in threat detection, but other structures as well, all of which are subcortical.

因此，它们可以包括下丘脑之类的东西，也就是位于上颚上方的密集神经元集合，涉及攻击性或温度调节、睡眠-觉醒周期等，以及您可能听说过更多的结构，例如杏仁核，它涉及威胁检测，但也包括其他结构，所有这些结构都位于皮质下。

Now, those subcortical structures can be compared in a fairly general but still accurate way to the prefrontal cortex, which is involved in contextual planning, involved in assessing outcomes.

现在，这些皮质下结构可以以相当普遍但仍然准确的方式与前额皮质进行比较，前额皮质参与情境规划，参与评估结果。

If I do A, what will happen?

如果我做A，会发生什么？

If I do B, what will happen?

如果我做B，会发生什么？

The prefrontal cortex is also associated with our self-concept of our identity, who we are, what we are about, what we value, what motivates our decisions to do or to not do things.

前额叶皮层还与我们对身份的自我概念有关，我们是谁，我们是什么，我们看重什么，是什么促使我们决定做或不做某事。

So I don't want to create any false impressions that the prefrontal cortex is somehow a more evolved structure than the subcortical and limbic structures, but in some sense, it is.

因此，我不想造成任何错误的印象，即前额叶皮层在某种程度上是比皮层下和边缘结构更进化的结构，但从某种意义上来说，确实如此。

It's involved in more "sophisticated functions" or at least functions that involve us really thinking and being able to place a coherent narrative of what happened in the past, what's happening now, and what's likely to happen in the future if conditions A, B, or C happen to arise.

它涉及更“复杂的功能”，或者至少涉及我们真正思考并能够对过去发生的事情、现在正在发生的事情以及如果条件 A、B 或 C 发生时将来可能发生的事情进行连贯的叙述。

Okay?

好的？

So that's a very brief top-level contour lesson in prefrontal cortical function and comparing it a bit to some subcortical and limbic structure functions.

这是关于前额皮质功能的非常简短的顶级轮廓课程，并将其与一些皮质下和边缘结构功能进行了比较。

Now, there have been neuroimaging studies, in particular studies by the Lieberman Laboratory at University of California, Los Angeles, but neuroimaging studies in other laboratories as well that have established that when people recount very stressful or traumatic events, the prefrontal cortex level of activity is reduced as compared to when people recall less stressful or less traumatic events.

现在，已经有神经影像学研究，特别是加州大学洛杉矶分校利伯曼实验室的研究，但其他实验室的神经影像学研究也证实，当人们回忆压力很大或创伤性事件时，与回忆压力较小或创伤性较小的事件时相比，前额皮质的活动水平会降低。

In addition to that, those subcortical structures ramp up their activity when people recall traumatic events, at least at first.

除此之外，当人们回忆起创伤事件时，这些皮质下结构会增强其活动，至少在开始时是这样。

Okay, this is very important.

好的，这非常重要。

What I'm about to tell you is that the repeated visiting of stressful and traumatic events in a structured way or even in a pseudo-structured way, as is the case when people first start journaling about that stressful or traumatic event on day one, when it tends to be a pretty unstructured narrative that's actually been shown in the literature.

我要告诉你的是，以结构化的方式甚至以伪结构化的方式重复访问压力和创伤事件，就像人们在第一天开始记录压力或创伤事件时的情况一样，当时它往往是一种相当非结构化的叙述，实际上已经在文献中展示过。

And then over the course of that second and third and fourth writing bout, people not only shift the sort of language that they use to describe their feelings in that event, as we talked about earlier, but the degree to which there's a more coherent narrative placed on the structure of that writing increases with each subsequent bout of writing.

然后，在第二次、第三次和第四次写作的过程中，人们不仅改变了他们用来描述他们在该事件中的感受的语言类型，正如我们之前谈到的，而且在写作结构上放置更连贯的叙述的程度随着随后的每一次写作而增加。

And this is very important because what we're really talking about here is people going deeper into their recollection of the experience, not remaining at such a superficial level.

这非常重要，因为我们在这里真正讨论的是人们更深入地回忆经历，而不是停留在如此肤浅的水平。

And two things are happening.

有两件事正在发生。

Even though they're going deeper into this very distressing event, they're perhaps even experiencing heightened levels of distress, right?

尽管他们正在深入了解这一非常令人痛苦的事件，但他们甚至可能正在经历更高程度的痛苦，对吧？

If you recall back to earlier in the episode when I talked about people who tend to be on the low disclosure end of things, they're not very verbose, they don't tend to use a lot of emotional words, and early on, they're not sharing too much about this experience, and over time it increases Whereas the other group decreased the level of emotionality with each subsequent writing bout.

如果你回想起这一集的早些时候，当我谈到那些倾向于在事情的低披露端的人时，他们不是很冗长，他们不倾向于使用很多情感词汇，而且在早期，他们并没有分享太多关于这种经历，随着时间的推移，它会增加，而另一组在随后的每次写作中都会降低情感水平。

But in each case, the coherence of the narrative, that is the degree to which the narrative takes on a story-like structure, increases from the first to the fourth writing bout.

但在每种情况下，叙事的连贯性，即叙事呈现故事结构的程度，从第一轮到第四轮写作都在增加。

And this is very important because what we're really talking about here is increasing the amount of truth-telling, the honesty around the experience.

这非常重要，因为我们在这里真正讨论的是增加说真话的数量，即体验的诚实度。

And when we say honesty, I'm not talking about any prior debate or ongoing debate about what happened during those experiences.

当我们说诚实时，我并不是在谈论任何先前的辩论或正在进行的关于这些经历期间发生的事情的辩论。

Remember, when people do this protocol, you're recalling what happened.

请记住，当人们执行此协议时，您正在回忆发生的事情。

What were the facts in your mind?

你心中的事实是什么？

What were the facts?

事实是什么？

What happened?

发生了什么？

What didn't happen perhaps is relevant, too, but what happened?

没有发生的事情也许也相关，但是发生了什么？

Second, how did it make you feel?

其次，这让你感觉如何？

That's something that you are uniquely qualified to answer factually because only you can really know how you feel.

这是你唯一有资格如实回答的问题，因为只有你才能真正知道自己的感受。

Sometimes it takes some effort to think into how you feel to really get a clear sense of how you felt and how you feel, but only you can report that factually.

有时需要付出一些努力来思考您的感受，才能真正清楚地了解您的感受和感受，但只有您才能如实报告。

No one can dispute that.

没有人可以质疑这一点。

Those are your feelings, and that's part of what you're writing about.

这些是你的感受，也是你所写内容的一部分。

And then, of course, there's the third component of what are the connections between different experiences that are coming to mind.

当然，第三个组成部分是我想到的不同经历之间的联系。

And there again, that is your unique factual report of what's going on inside your head around that event.

再说一次，这是你独特的事实报告，描述了你头脑中围绕该事件发生的事情。

Okay?

好的？

So what we're talking about here is an exercise in writing that, yes, is distressing, but that we know based on neuroimaging data, over time is increasing the baseline levels of activity in certain key areas of the prefrontal cortex.

所以我们在这里讨论的是一种写作练习，是的，这是令人痛苦的，但我们根据神经影像数据知道，随着时间的推移，前额皮质某些关键区域的活动基线水平正在增加。

And that we know is associated with improvements in the symptomology around trauma and other stressful events.

我们知道这与创伤和其他压力事件症状的改善有关。

Now it's extremely important to highlight this truth-telling component and the fact that your truth about these experiences is indeed your truth, and it's such a key component of the writing exercise.

现在，强调讲真话的成分以及你对这些经历的真相确实是你的真相这一事实非常重要，这是写作练习的关键组成部分。

So what we're looking at here is a situation where the event or events that happened actually happened.

所以我们在这里看到的是已经发生的一个或多个事件实际发生的情况。

There's no changing that.

这一点没有改变。

But your narrative about those events is vitally important in terms of how you experience either ongoing distress from or relief from those events.

但你对这些事件的叙述对于你如何经历这些事件带来的持续痛苦或缓解至关重要。

And in sort of a counterintuitive way, reporting those events in a way that initially is very stressful or that can be stressful in any number of those different four writing bouts, over time provides relief from that stress.

以一种违反直觉的方式，以一种最初非常有压力的方式报告这些事件，或者在这四次不同的写作回合中的任意数量中可能会产生压力，随着时间的推移，可以缓解这种压力。

So why do I say counterintuitive?

那么为什么我说违反直觉呢？

Well, you could say, okay, well then does distress itself cause changes in the prefrontal cortex that are positive?

好吧，你可以说，好吧，那么痛苦本身会导致前额皮质发生积极的变化吗？

No. In fact, the opposite is true.

不，事实上，事实恰恰相反。

We know that being under conditions of duress or stress or trauma reduces activity in the prefrontal cortex, and here we're saying recalling that trauma and stress in ways that are highly emotional and negative is actually increasing ongoing activity in the prefrontal cortex.

我们知道，处于胁迫、压力或创伤的情况下会减少前额叶皮层的活动，在这里我们说的是，以高度情绪化和消极的方式回忆创伤和压力实际上会增加前额叶皮层的持续活动。

And indeed, yes, that is the case.

确实，是的，情况就是如此。

So how could that be?

那怎么可能呢？

During development, neuroplasticity is a passive process.

在发育过程中，神经可塑性是一个被动的过程。

Whatever we are exposed to changes our brain in a way that allows us to more reliably predict the future, right?

无论我们接触到什么，都会改变我们的大脑，使我们能够更可靠地预测未来，对吗？

That's one of the key functions of the brain.

这是大脑的关键功能之一。

But as an adult, meaning from age 25 onward, and really that's not a strict cutoff, could be late teens, maybe 19, all the way up to, say, age 120, which we think is perhaps the maximum lifespan that humans could possibly reach.

但作为一个成年人，从 25 岁开始，实际上这并不是一个严格的界限，可能是十几岁，也许是 19 岁，一直到 120 岁，我们认为这可能是人类可能达到的最长寿命。

We don't know.

我们不知道。

Most people don't reach 120, but let's say from 19 all the way up to 120.

大多数人都没有达到 120 岁，但我们可以说从 19 岁一直到 120 岁。

We know that neuroplasticity is created when the nervous system goes into states that are atypical as compared to our normal waking states.

我们知道，当神经系统进入与我们正常清醒状态相比非典型的状态时，就会产生神经可塑性。

And one of the key triggers for neuroplasticity is when we have high levels of the so-called catecholamines: dopamine, epinephrine, and/or norepinephrine in our brain and body.

神经可塑性的关键触发因素之一是当我们的大脑和身体中存在高水平的所谓儿茶酚胺：多巴胺、肾上腺素和/或去甲肾上腺素时。

That creates a state change that we call autonomic nervous system shift where we have elevated heart rate, more distress, high degrees of emotionality.

这会产生一种我们称之为自主神经系统转变的状态变化，使我们的心率加快、更加痛苦、高度情绪化。

It is highly uncomfortable often, and yet that signals to the neural tissue, "Hey, something's happening here and we need to rewire.

这通常非常不舒服，但这会向神经组织发出信号：“嘿，这里发生了一些事情，我们需要重新布线。

We need to change it." And the actual rewiring occurs during deep sleep and states such as non-sleep deep rest or anytime we're in a deep relaxation state.

我们需要改变它。”实际的重新布线发生在深度睡眠和非睡眠深度休息等状态或我们处于深度放松状态的任何时候。

Some of you have heard me talk about neuroplasticity before, but the key elements to remember for today's discussion is that these states of heightened levels of emotionality are the trigger for neuroplasticity and that the actual rewiring of neural connections happens in sleep and states such as non-sleep deep rest.

你们中的一些人以前听过我谈论神经可塑性，但今天讨论中要记住的关键要素是，这些情绪水平升高的状态是神经可塑性的触发因素，而神经连接的实际重新布线发生在睡眠和非睡眠深度休息等状态中。

So if we were to be completely logical, we would sit back at this point and say, "Okay, here's a protocol in which we deliberately make ourselves stressed out again about a very stressful or traumatic event.

因此，如果我们完全合乎逻辑，我们会在这一点上坐下来说：“好吧，这是一个协议，我们故意让自己因一件非常有压力或创伤的事件而再次感到压力。

And yet even though that stressful or traumatic event at first created problems for our mental and physical health, by revisiting it and triggering that stressful experience again four times in a lot of detail, somehow it's giving me relief from that experience?

然而，尽管那个压力或创伤性事件一开始给我们的精神和身体健康带来了问题，但通过重新审视它并在很多细节上再次触发压力经历四次，不知何故它让我从那种经历中解脱出来？

It's creating positive mental and physical shifts?" How could that be?

它正在创造积极的精神和身体转变吗？”怎么可能呢？

How could it be that the negative experience on the one hand creates problems and then on the other hand, recreating that negative experience relieves those very same problems?

为什么消极的经历一方面会产生问题，而另一方面，重新创造消极的经历又可以缓解同样的问题呢？

There's something completely illogical about that framework, right?

这个框架有些完全不合逻辑，对吧？

Well, here's where things get really interesting.

好吧，这就是事情变得非常有趣的地方。

There have been two separate collections of work in the psychology and neuroscience literature in the last 10 years which have focused mainly on two concepts.

在过去的十年里，心理学和神经科学文献中有两本独立的著作集，主要集中在两个概念上。

The first concept is that extremely stressful and traumatic experiences because they induce a relative reduction in the activity in the prefrontal cortex, divorce our mind from creating a coherent structural narrative about what happened during those particular episodes, and in doing so, create a sort of confusion about responsibility.

第一个概念是极度紧张和创伤性的经历，因为它们会导致前额叶皮层活动相对减少，使我们的大脑无法对这些特定事件期间发生的事情建立连贯的结构性叙述，从而造成一种关于责任的混乱。

Now there's a whole discussion to be had about this, and we will have that discussion in a future episode of the podcast about how trauma is actually mapped within the brain and body.

现在对此有一个完整的讨论，我们将在播客的未来一集中讨论创伤如何在大脑和身体内实际映射。

There are a lot of theories about this, right?

关于这个有很多理论，对吗？

Sometimes we hear that it's all mapped within the body.

有时我们听说这一切都映射在体内。

Sometimes we hear it's all mapped within the brain.

有时我们听说这一切都映射在大脑内。

Turns out, as is Almost always the case, it's both.

事实证明，几乎总是如此，两者都是。

But there does seem to be both neuroscience-based and psychology, both clinical and research psychology-based evidence for the idea that when people experience very stressful and traumatic events, that the representation of those events is somewhat fractured in the sense that people, by not talking about them, by not creating a coherent narrative around them, start to form false correlations between the kind of stress that they create in our body and mind when we think about them, and a confusion about what happened, a confusion about why we feel terrible when maybe we weren't the perpetrator, or create a sort of lack of coherence between our bodily state and what we're thinking, especially because we're not the perpetrator, right?

但似乎确实有基于神经科学和心理学、临床和研究心理学的证据表明，当人们经历非常有压力和创伤性的事件时，这些事件的表现在某种程度上是支离破碎的，因为人们不谈论这些事件，不围绕这些事件创造一个连贯的叙述，开始在我们思考这些事件时在我们的身体和心灵中产生的压力与对发生的事情的困惑，对为什么我们感觉糟糕而感到困惑，而我们可能不是那些事件之间形成错误的关联。肇事者，或者在我们的身体状态和我们的想法之间造成某种缺乏连贯性，特别是因为我们不是肇事者，对吗？

Here we're talking about traumas and stressful things that happened to us.

在这里，我们谈论的是发生在我们身上的创伤和有压力的事情。

Maybe we were participants in that by virtue of our circumstances, but when we talk about traumas, what we're really talking about are things that we would have never elected to do otherwise.

也许由于我们的情况，我们是其中的参与者，但当我们谈论创伤时，我们真正谈论的是我们永远不会选择做的事情。

Okay?

好的？

So I don't want to be too abstract about this, but again, within the neuroscience and psychology understanding of trauma and stress, it seems that there's a lack of coherence about the narrative, there's also a mismatch between the bodily state and thoughts about that experience, and there seems to be a confusion about who or what was responsible for inducing that negative state in a way that, in some sense, causes people to set aside that narrative and try and push it away and not think about it because it is confusing.

所以我不想对此过于抽象，但同样，在神经科学和心理学对创伤和压力的理解中，叙述似乎缺乏连贯性，身体状态和对这种经历的想法之间也存在不匹配，而且似乎对谁或什么负责诱发这种消极状态感到困惑，在某种程度上，这导致人们抛开这种叙述，试图将其推开而不去思考它，因为它令人困惑。

It can often even be discombobulating.

它常常甚至会令人混乱。

For those that have suffered from very stressful events and trauma, I think some of this will resonate with you.

对于那些遭受过压力很大的事件和创伤的人来说，我认为其中的一些内容会引起你的共鸣。

Now, a separate literature that's largely nested just within the neuroscience community, although it's starting to wick out into the psychology community as well, is the idea that when people tell the truth, and in particular, when people tell the truth with a very coherent, structured narrative, the levels of activity in the prefrontal cortex increase, but not just temporarily.

现在，一个主要存在于神经科学界的独立文献，尽管它也开始渗透到心理学界，它的观点是，当人们说真话时，特别是当人们以非常连贯、结构化的叙述说真话时，前额叶皮层的活动水平会增加，但不仅仅是暂时的。

That is that there's neuroplasticity of these prefrontal cortical structures, which are both involved in generating coherent narratives, but are also involved, and this is super important, that are also involved in regulating the activity of those subcortical structures like the hypothalamus and limbic structures.

也就是说，这些前额叶皮质结构具有神经可塑性，它们不仅参与产生连贯的叙述，而且还参与调节那些皮质下结构（如下丘脑和边缘结构）的活动，这是非常重要的。

In other words, that when we can increase our understanding of an event, when we can understand why certain emotions arose, what our role in it really was, what others' roles in that particular event were, well, then by increasing the activity of the prefrontal cortex, it's better both in that moment and going forward to regulate the activity of these other subcortical structures.

换句话说，当我们能够增加对某个事件的理解时，当我们能够理解为什么会产生某些情绪时，我们在其中真正扮演的角色是什么，其他人在该特定事件中的角色是什么时，那么通过增加前额叶皮层的活动，在那一刻和未来都更好地调节这些其他皮层下结构的活动。

And I think one of the more impressive experiments within that whole field of linking prefrontal activity to truth-telling is an experiment that was published a few years ago in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences entitled "Increasing Honesty in Humans with Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation." Now, this is a very artificial scenario where people come into the laboratory and they have people do what is essentially a die-rolling game.

我认为，在将前额叶活动与说真话联系起来的整个领域中，最令人印象深刻的实验之一是几年前发表在《美国国家科学院院刊》上的一项实验，题为“通过非侵入性大脑刺激提高人类的诚实性”。现在，这是一个非常人为的场景，人们进入实验室，让人们做本质上是掷骰子的游戏。

They roll dice.

他们掷骰子。

Okay, so they're rolling dice, and then after they roll the dice, only they can see the score that they get with those dice.

好吧，他们正在掷骰子，然后在掷骰子之后，只有他们才能看到他们用这些骰子得到的分数。

And then a number is presented on a screen, and they have to report whether or not the die roll that they did matches or does not match the number that's presented on the screen.

然后屏幕上显示一个数字，他们必须报告他们掷的骰子是否与屏幕上显示的数字匹配。

And if it does match, then they get a monetary award.

如果确实匹配，那么他们就会获得金钱奖励。

And the monetary award is not huge, but it's not insignificant either.

而且奖金虽然不算多，但也不是微不足道的。

For each die roll where they match the number that's presented on the screen, they get the equivalent of, and because this experiment was done in Switzerland, nine Swiss francs, which at the time of the study corresponded roughly to $9, and today corresponds to roughly $10.

对于与屏幕上显示的数字相匹配的每个骰子，他们得到的金额相当于 9 瑞士法郎（因为该实验是在瑞士进行的），在研究时大约相当于 9 美元，现在大约相当于 10 美元。

So they do this repeatedly, and so in some sense, the subjects in these experiments are in a place to make not an enormous amount of money, but again, not an insignificant amount either.

所以他们反复这样做，所以从某种意义上说，这些实验中的受试者赚到的钱虽然不是巨额，但同样也不是微不足道的。

Now, here's the key component of the study.

现在，这是该研究的关键部分。

The statistics of the dice that they roll, and the statistics of die rolling, and the numbers that they are presented make sure that there can only be a correct match on average 50% of the time.

他们掷出的骰子的统计数据、骰子掷出的统计数据以及它们所呈现的数字确保了平均只有 50% 的时间才能出现正确的匹配。

Okay?

好的？

And in this experiment, the subjects are asked to report entirely on the honor system what they got when they rolled the dice.

在这个实验中，受试者被要求完整地报告他们在掷骰子时得到的荣誉系统。

And what one finds in this study and other studies that have been done subsequent to it is that when you take everyday people, so you take men and women, you take a broad age range, you're not selecting for sociopaths, you're not selecting for people in one given profession or another.

人们在这项研究和随后进行的其他研究中发现，当你选择普通人时，所以你选择男人和女人，你选择的年龄范围很广，你不是在选择反社会者，你不是在选择某一特定职业的人。

Pick your favorite profession if you were to assume any one given profession has less honest people than others.

如果您假设某一特定职业的人不如其他职业诚实，请选择您最喜欢的职业。

They collect people from all sorts of walks of life, and people report getting the same number that is presented to them, that is a match, about 68% of the time, which means they are not faithfully reporting what happened.

他们收集了来自各行各业的人，人们报告说得到的数字与提供给他们的数字相同，即匹配，大约 68% 的情况下，这意味着他们没有如实报告所发生的事情。

Now, neuroimaging studies show that when people lie, certain areas of the frontal cortex increase in their activity, although the major effect when one looks neurally is a reduction in the prefrontal cortex, and in particular, subcompartments of the prefrontal cortex that we'll talk about in a moment.

现在，神经影像学研究表明，当人们说谎时，额叶皮层的某些区域的活动会增加，尽管从神经角度看，主要影响是前额叶皮层的减少，特别是我们稍后将讨论的前额叶皮层的子区室的减少。

And this particular study, entitled "Increasing Honesty in Humans with Non-Invasive Brain Stimulation," as the name suggests, used non-invasive brain stimulation.

这项名为“通过非侵入性大脑刺激提高人类诚实度”的特殊研究，顾名思义，使用了非侵入性大脑刺激。

So this is transcranial magnetic stimulation, which is a really nice and convenient tool because you don't have to drill down through the skull.

这就是经颅磁刺激，这是一个非常好的和方便的工具，因为你不必深入颅骨。

You can simply put this tool, it's a little coil, you put it over a particular part of the brain, but on the outside of the skull, indeed on the outside of the hair, and you can either inhibit or stimulate particular brain areas using this transcranial stimulation.

你可以简单地把这个工具，它是一个小线圈，你把它放在大脑的特定部分，但在头骨的外面，实际上是在头发的外面，你可以使用这种经颅刺激来抑制或刺激特定的大脑区域。

I've actually had this done, not in this particular experiment, but I had it done when I was a graduate student some years ago, and it was placed over my motor cortex, and I was instructed to tap my fingers in a particular sequence, and then they inhibit neural activity in a particular brain area, and I was unable to tap in that same sequence, and they could even shut down my ability to tap.

我实际上已经完成了这个，不是在这个特定的实验中，但几年前我还是一名研究生时就完成了它，它被放置在我的运动皮层上，我被指示以特定的顺序敲击我的手指，然后它们抑制特定大脑区域的神经活动，而我无法以相同的顺序敲击，他们甚至可以关闭我敲击的能力。

It was terrifying, frankly, although I don't want to discourage anyone from participating in any of these experiments should you choose.

坦率地说，这很可怕，尽管我不想阻止任何人参与任何这些实验（如果你选择的话）。

And yes, of course, your motor abilities come back immediately afterwards.

是的，当然，您的运动能力随后会立即恢复。

That's why they can run these experiments.

这就是为什么他们可以进行这些实验。

Now, in this experiment, what they did is they stimulated or inhibited neural activity in particular areas of the prefrontal cortex, and what they discovered was, I think, and many others, by the way, also agree, a remarkable result, which is that when they stimulated over a particular region of the prefrontal cortex, people's honest report of what happened when they rolled the die relative to the number they were presented increased.

现在，在这个实验中，他们所做的是刺激或抑制前额叶皮层特定区域的神经活动，我想，顺便说一句，许多其他人也同意，他们发现了一个显着的结果，那就是当他们刺激前额叶皮层的特定区域时，人们对掷骰子时发生的情况的诚实报告相对于他们所看到的数字有所增加。

Okay, so they went from reporting that they had matched the number on the screen and therefore won money 68% of the time.

好吧，他们从报告说他们已经匹配了屏幕上的数字，因此 68% 的情况下赢了钱。

That number was reduced down to what?

这个数字减少到了多少？

Down to 50% of the time.

下降到 50% 的时间。

In other words, this stimulation of the prefrontal cortex took dishonest people, even though they were, shall we say, mildly dishonest or dishonest only in certain conditions.

换句话说，这种对前额皮质的刺激吸引了不诚实的人，即使我们可以说，他们是轻度不诚实或仅在某些情况下不诚实。

We're getting into judgment calls, and I don't want to do that, and made them truly honest.

我们正在做出判断，我不想这样做，并让他们真正诚实。

They faithfully represented reality when a particular area of the prefrontal cortex, and that area, by the way, is the dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, was activated.

当前额叶皮层的特定区域（顺便说一下，该区域是背外侧前额叶皮层）被激活时，它们忠实地代表了现实。

They became truly honest.

他们变得真正诚实。

They faithfully represented what happened in the die-rolling game.

他们忠实地再现了掷骰子游戏中发生的事情。

Now, the conditions in this experiment are far and away different from the journaling protocol that we've talked about up until now.

现在，这个实验中的条件与我们迄今为止讨论的日志协议有很大不同。

However, there have been subsequent studies that have shown that indeed, when people tell the truth to the best of their abilities, they are absolutely trying to faithfully report what happened in a given experience of theirs.

然而，随后的研究表明，确实，当人们尽其所能说出真相时，他们绝对是在试图忠实地报告他们特定经历中发生的事情。

Activity in the prefrontal cortex goes up, and it persists afterwards.

前额叶皮层的活动上升，并且随后持续存在。

There is indeed neuroplasticity of the prefrontal cortex.

前额皮质确实具有神经可塑性。

So the hypothesis that seems to be the most likely and indeed has the greatest weight of evidence for it is that when people accurately and truthfully report an experience, even if that experience is a stressful and traumatic one, the repeated activation of the prefrontal cortex that occurs during that truth-telling, even though the truth-telling is about a highly negative experience, has the net effect over time of leading to more activity in the prefrontal cortex.

因此，似乎最有可能且确实具有最大证据量的假设是，当人们准确而真实地报告一种经历时，即使这种经历是一种压力和创伤性的经历，在说真话期间发生的前额叶皮层的重复激活，即使说真话是关于一种高度消极的经历，随着时间的推移，会产生净效应，导致前额叶皮层更多的活动。

And that has a sort of runaway positive effect in the sense that it creates a more coherent framework and understanding of the stressful thing that happened, right?

这具有某种失控的积极作用，因为它创建了一个更加连贯的框架和对所发生的压力事件的理解，对吗？

So all that discombobulation and that lack of coherent story that then leads to lack of coherence in terms of one's autonomic function, so underlying stress and confusion about who's responsible, that does seem to be resolved, or at least partially resolved.

因此，所有那些混乱和缺乏连贯性的故事会导致一个人的自主功能缺乏连贯性，因此潜在的压力和对谁负责的困惑，这似乎确实得到了解决，或者至少部分解决了。

And the prefrontal cortex, of course, doesn't harbor one area just for faithful, accurate reporting of traumas and stressful events.

当然，前额皮质并不只是一个专门用于忠实、准确地报告创伤和压力事件的区域。

That very same area, that dorsolateral prefrontal cortex, is responsible for faithful reporting of all sorts of other things.

背外侧前额叶皮层正是这个区域，负责忠实地报告各种其他事情。

And there are now more and more studies showing that truth-telling, faithful, accurate representation of what we at least experienced in our past and are experiencing presently, is good for us both in the short term and the long term.

现在有越来越多的研究表明，如实、忠实、准确地描述我们至少在过去经历过的和现在正在经历的事情，无论从短期还是长期来看，都对我们有好处。

And this, I believe, and other researchers, both neuroscientists and psychologists and psychiatrists that I've talked to about this result, are in agreement that when one sees all these positive shifts in, say, immune system function, like how could it be that these cells produced by the bone marrow and the thymus are somehow better able to deal with an infection when one has recounted a traumatic or stressful event, right?

我相信，我所采访过的其他研究人员，包括神经科学家、心理学家和精神病学家，都一致认为，当人们看到免疫系统功能方面的所有这些积极变化时，例如，当一个人讲述了一件创伤或压力事件时，这些由骨髓和胸腺产生的细胞如何能够以某种方式更好地应对感染，对吧？

First of all, it's counterintuitive.

首先，这是违反直觉的。

Second of all, why would that be?

其次，为什么会这样？

I mean, how are the body and brain linked in that way?

我的意思是，身体和大脑是如何以这种方式联系起来的？

Well, they're linked through this thing that we call the nervous system.

嗯，它们通过我们称之为神经系统的东西联系在一起。

And the key component of the nervous system in this context is that when the prefrontal cortex can organize its understanding of why our autonomic nervous system was so active, well, then the autonomic nervous system, it seems, becomes less likely to be active when it's not supposed to, okay?

在这种情况下，神经系统的关键组成部分是，当前额叶皮层能够组织理解为什么我们的自主神经系统如此活跃时，那么自主神经系统似乎在不应该活跃的时候变得不太可能活跃，好吗？

That could at least partially explain the reductions in anxiety, the improvements in sleep, the reductions in insomnia, and because the nervous system and the immune system are in direct communication.

这至少可以部分解释焦虑的减少、睡眠的改善、失眠的减少，以及因为神经系统和免疫系统是直接沟通的。

This often isn't discussed, but not only does the immune system impact the brain, but the brain has networks, literally neural circuits that innervate structures like the spleen, like the thalamus, that can communicate with the bone marrow, right?

这通常不会被讨论，但不仅免疫系统会影响大脑，而且大脑也有网络，即神经回路，它们支配脾脏和丘脑等结构，可以与骨髓进行交流，对吗？

This isn't science fiction.

这不是科幻小说。

This is really the case.

事实确实如此。

In fact, there was an article that just came out in the journal "Nature" this month, and I'll provide a link to it in the show note captions, which is finally starting to acknowledge that, yes, while these fields of immunology and brain science and psychology have existed as disparate silos up until now, it's oh so clear that the nervous system is the connection between all these different components of brain and body.

事实上，本月《自然》杂志上刚刚发表了一篇文章，我将在节目注释标题中提供该文章的链接，该文章终于开始承认，是的，虽然免疫学、脑科学和心理学这些领域迄今为止一直作为不同的孤岛存在，但很明显，神经系统是大脑和身体所有这些不同组成部分之间的联系。

And so while it might seem counterintuitive that a writing protocol of the sort that we've been talking about today could positively impact the immune system, or that a writing protocol of the sort that we are talking about today could positively impact things like fibromyalgia symptoms, well, it makes perfect sense really when we start to think about the prefrontal cortex as this highly flexible seat of our cognition, about our self-representation, our ideas about who we are, and about when certain elements within our brain and body ought to be activated and when they ought not to be activated.

因此，虽然我们今天讨论的那种写作方案可能对免疫系统产生积极影响，或者我们今天讨论的那种写作方案可能对纤维肌痛症状等产生积极影响，这似乎有悖常理，但是，当我们开始将前额叶皮层视为我们认知的高度灵活的所在地，思考我们的自我表现，我们对自己是谁的想法，以及我们大脑和身体中的某些元素何时应该发挥作用时，这确实是完全有道理的。何时被激活以及何时不应该被激活。

Because so much of the negative symptomology of stressful events and traumas is about the kind of disarray and discombobulated activation of wakefulness in the middle of sleep, right?

因为压力事件和创伤的负面症状大多与睡眠中觉醒的混乱和混乱激活有关，对吗？

Getting woken up in the middle of the night and not being able to go back to sleep, or elevated heart rate, panic attacks, anxiety, and on and on.

半夜醒来，无法再入睡，或者心率加快、惊恐发作、焦虑等等。

I talked about some of this in the Huberman Lab podcast episode that I did about stress and how to master stress with particular protocols.

我在 Huberman Lab 播客节目中谈到了其中的一些内容，该节目涉及压力以及如何通过特定协议控制压力。

It also came up in the discussion with Dr. Paul Conti in the episode about trauma and the series on mental health.

在有关创伤的剧集和有关心理健康的系列节目中，与保罗·孔蒂博士的讨论中也提到了这一点。

So what we're pulling together here is a mechanistic understanding of why something like Writing for 15 to 30 minutes about a stressful or traumatic episode would or even could induce all these positive shifts in mental and physical health.

因此，我们在这里聚集的是一个机械性的理解，为什么像写 15 到 30 分钟关于压力或创伤事件这样的事情会甚至可能会导致心理和身体健康的所有这些积极转变。

And while we don't have a complete understanding about the underlying mechanisms, the activation and the neuroplasticity of the prefrontal cortex seems to be one of the most logical and the most likely that sits at the center of at least the top list of the most important mechanisms.

虽然我们对潜在的机制还没有完全的了解，但前额叶皮层的激活和神经可塑性似乎是最合乎逻辑、最有可能位于至少最重要机制的中心的机制之一。

I want to be clear that yes, indeed, I'm saying that when you write about your truth, about the facts, the events of an experience, and your emotions as they relate to that experience and the connections that you draw between any number of different things around that experience, that the truth-telling is the stimulus, and that the emotion that accompanies that truth-telling is what allows for neuroplasticity to occur, and that indeed truth-telling and heightened levels of emotion, even if they're negative emotions, really do seem to have a positive rehabilitative effect.

我想澄清的是，是的，确实，我是说，当你写下你的真相、事实、经历的事件和你的情绪，因为它们与该经历有关，以及你在围绕该经历的许多不同事物之间建立的联系时，说真话是刺激，伴随着说真话的情绪是允许神经可塑性发生的东西，事实上，说真话和高度的情绪，即使它们是负面情绪，确实似乎可以促进神经可塑性的发生。具有积极的康复作用。

They're not necessarily going to cure every ailment.

它们不一定能治愈所有疾病。

I certainly don't want to give that impression, nor am I saying that people can't still benefit from therapy, talk therapy, or other forms of therapy like prescription drug therapy, et cetera.

我当然不想给人这种印象，我也不是说人们仍然不能从治疗、谈话治疗或其他形式的治疗（如处方药治疗等）中受益。

Those certainly have their place.

这些当然有它们的位置。

You should talk to an expert psychiatrist, psychologist, medical doctor, of course.

当然，你应该咨询精神科医生、心理学家、医生。

And in fact, the data on the sort of journaling that we talked about today indicate that people's progression through talk therapy, drug therapies, et cetera, for depression and PTSD is accelerated, and significantly so, when they do this type of journaling.

事实上，我们今天讨论的这类日记的数据表明，当人们写这类日记时，通过谈话疗法、药物疗法等治疗抑郁症和创伤后应激障碍的进展会加速，而且效果显着。

So the sort of journaling we're talking about today and other therapies are not mutually exclusive.

因此，我们今天讨论的日记和其他疗法并不相互排斥。

And yet the journaling protocol that Pennebaker and colleagues came up with, I think is spectacular because it has a number of important features, and some of those are perhaps obvious to you already.

然而，我认为彭尼贝克及其同事提出的日记协议非常引人注目，因为它具有许多重要的功能，其中一些功能可能对您来说已经很明显了。

First of all, it's completely zero cost.

首先，它完全是零成本。

It costs a bit of time, but not even that much time.

这会花费一些时间，但甚至不需要那么多时间。

It has an emotional cost.

它有情感成本。

We should acknowledge that.

我们应该承认这一点。

It's intense, right?

很激烈，对吧？

And the more intense it seems, the more effective.

而且看起来越强烈，就越有效。

And third, it's something that really can be done either in the course of four days or across an entire month, so it has some degree of flexibility to it.

第三，这确实可以在四天或整个月内完成，因此它具有一定程度的灵活性。

I would even say a great degree of flexibility to it.

我什至可以说它具有很大程度的灵活性。

And last but certainly not least, it's been shown over and over again, more than 200 peer-reviewed studies, not just from Pennebaker but from others as well, to have myriad positive effects on the body and the mind in ways that are not just short-term but that are pervasive, not just over months, but indeed over years.

最后但并非最不重要的一点是，200 多项经过同行评审的研究（不仅来自 Pennebaker，还来自其他机构）一再证明，这些研究对身体和心灵产生无数积极影响，这些影响不仅是短期的，而且是普遍的，不仅持续数月，而且确实持续数年。

So I don't know about you, but when I first learned about this literature, I was, well, initially a little bit skeptical because that's just my nature.

所以我不了解你的情况，但是当我第一次了解这些文献时，我最初有点怀疑，因为这就是我的本性。

I'm like, "Wait, how could journaling have such a huge impact?" I've been journaling for years.

我想，“等等，日记怎么能产生如此巨大的影响呢？”我写日记已经很多年了。

I know other people that journal on a regular basis, and I've never heard of this particular impact, and I certainly haven't heard or seen the data.

我认识其他定期写日记的人，但我从未听说过这种特殊的影响，我当然也没有听说过或看到过这些数据。

But when I started looking at the data, I thought, "Oh, my goodness, how come I haven't heard about this?"

但当我开始查看数据时，我想：“天哪，我怎么没听说过这个？”

And I don't really have an answer for that.

我对此并没有真正的答案。

Although I will say that Pennebaker and others, I think, were very early in their merging of mind and body states.

尽管我会说，我认为彭尼贝克和其他人很早就开始了身心状态的融合。

Although the initial studies weren't really focused on mind and body.

尽管最初的研究并没有真正关注身心。

All the emphasis on immune system and brain and neuroscience, that actually came later.

所有对免疫系统、大脑和神经科学的强调实际上是后来才出现的。

So I think one of the reasons we haven't heard about this particular form of journaling is that, frankly, it's nested within the academic literature.

所以我认为我们没有听说过这种特殊形式的日记的原因之一是，坦率地说，它嵌套在学术文献中。

I haven't heard much about it being incorporated into clinical practices, although I am sure it is incorporated into clinical practices.

我还没有听说太多关于它被纳入临床实践的消息，尽管我确信它已被纳入临床实践。

And frankly, whatever the reason, I'm just grateful to my colleague, Dr. David Spiegel, who again is our associate chair of psychiatry at Stanford.

坦率地说，无论出于什么原因，我只是感谢我的同事大卫·斯皮格尔博士，他再次担任我们斯坦福大学精神病学副主任。

He's a medical doctor incredibly highly esteemed worldwide for his work on neuroplasticity and helping people with stress and anxiety and all sorts of other challenges, for informing me about it.

他是一位在世界范围内备受推崇的医生，因为他在神经可塑性方面的工作，以及帮助人们应对压力、焦虑和各种其他挑战，并告诉我这方面的情况。

So much so that I've decided that next month I'm going to do one bout of writing for each week within that month.

如此之多，以至于我决定下个月我将在该月内每周进行一轮写作。

I've opted to not do the four consecutive days of writing.

我选择不连续四天写作。

To me, just personally, that seems a bit too intense.

对我个人来说，这似乎有点太激烈了。

It's not the time commitment, it's the emotional commitment of placing myself into close proximity of some really challenging, stressful, maybe even traumatic memories day after day after day for four days.

这不是时间上的承诺，而是情感上的承诺，让自己在四天内日复一日地接近一些真正具有挑战性、有压力、甚至可能是创伤性的记忆。

Personally, I don't want to do that.

就我个人而言，我不想这样做。

Other people might opt to do that in tighter succession and do the four days in a row.

其他人可能会选择更紧密地连续进行，并连续四天进行。

What the literature tells us, again, is that it doesn't really matter.

文献再次告诉我们，这并不重要。

As long as you do the four bouts of writing sometime within a month period, doesn't matter if they all are back-to-back days or you spread them out by a week or so.

只要你在一个月内的某个时候进行四轮写作，无论它们是连续几天还是将它们分散一周左右都没有关系。

Just to recap the other components of the protocol, you're going to write about the same event for all four writing episodes.

只是为了回顾一下协议的其他组成部分，您将在所有四个写作章节中编写相同的事件。

Those writing episodes can be anywhere from 15 to 30 minutes, but not less.

这些写作片段的长度可以是 15 到 30 分钟，但不能少于 15 分钟。

Throughout each writing episode, you're going to continuously write.

在每个写作过程中，你都将不断地写作。

Right?

正确的？

Unless you need to stop to catch your breath or wipe your eyes dry of tears, you're going to keep writing.

除非你需要停下来喘口气或擦干眼泪，否则你会继续写作。

It is not necessary to pay attention to grammar or spelling, but some degree of coherence, maybe not perfect, complete sentences, but some degree of coherence is probably useful, especially if you decide to go back and analyze what you wrote later, which again is an option.

没有必要注意语法或拼写，但一定程度的连贯性，也许不是完美的、完整的句子，但一定程度的连贯性可能是有用的，特别是如果你决定回去分析你以后写的内容，这也是一个选择。

You don't have to do that.

你不必这样做。

But if you do want to do that, you're going to go back and circle the negative words, that is the words that you perceive to be negative, and you're going to square the words that are positive.

但如果你确实想这样做，你就要返回并圈出消极的词，即你认为消极的词，然后将积极的词划为正方形。

And if you like, you can also reread them and see whether or not, as was observed in the studies that we described, there was an increase in the amount of coherence about the topic or the event that you wrote about.

如果您愿意，您还可以重读它们，看看是否如我们所描述的研究中所观察到的那样，您所写的主题或事件的连贯性是否有所增加。

Keep in mind that for each of the four bouts of writing, you want to include both facts about the events, facts about how you felt and/or feel about those events now, and third, any associations whatsoever that happen to come to mind about those events, emotional states, people in your life, anything past, present, or future.

请记住，对于四轮写作中的每一轮，您都需要包括有关事件的事实，有关您现在对这些事件的感受和/或感受的事实，以及第三，您想到的有关这些事件的任何联想，情绪状态，您生活中的人，过去，现在或未来的任何事情。

That third category of things to include is really open to you for anything you want to include.

第三类要包含的内容实际上对您开放，可以包含任何您想要包含的内容。

The only requirement for it to be included is that it's true for you.

包含它的唯一要求是它对您来说是真实的。

Keep in mind also that this writing protocol is for you.

还要记住，这个写作协议是为你准备的。

It is not Necessarily to be shared.

不一定要共享。

Now, there isn't a rule that says that you cannot share it with anybody, although I do want to introduce the important caveat that if you are going to share it with someone, that person should be a dedicated healthcare, ideally mental healthcare professional.

现在，没有一条规则说你不能与任何人分享它，尽管我确实想提出一个重要的警告，如果你要与某人分享它，那个人应该是一名专门的医疗保健人员，最好是心理保健专业人员。

Because there are data that suggest that when we write about traumatic and stressful events, while it can be very beneficial for us, it can actually be traumatic or challenging for people that we read it to.

因为有数据表明，当我们写下创伤性和压力性事件时，虽然它对我们非常有益，但对于我们读给它的人来说，它实际上可能是创伤性的或具有挑战性的。

Now, there's huge variation around that statement.

现在，围绕这一说法存在着巨大的差异。

Certainly, many of you probably know friends or family members or other trusted ones that you can talk to that would be able to hear about your stressful or traumatic experience and not be traumatized by it.

当然，你们中的许多人可能认识朋友、家人或其他值得信赖的人，您可以与他们交谈，他们能够听到您的压力或创伤经历，而不会因此而受到创伤。

However, it does seem that the listener can experience trauma and negative symptoms, such as challenges sleeping, distress, et cetera, by hearing about very stressful events that have occurred to others.

然而，听者似乎确实可以通过听到他人发生的非常有压力的事件来经历创伤和负面症状，例如睡眠困难、痛苦等。

Okay, this is thirdhand trauma or observational trauma, it's sometimes called.

好吧，这有时被称为第三手创伤或观察创伤。

So if we were to adhere to the protocol as it was used in the various studies that form the basis for what we're talking about today, we would say that you are writing about something that is for your eyes only.

因此，如果我们要遵守构成我们今天所讨论内容基础的各种研究中使用的协议，我们会说您正在写一些仅供您查看的内容。

In fact, you are welcome to tear up or delete the document afterwards, and certainly you would want to store it in a safe place so that it's not going to fall into hands of somebody that you wouldn't want seeing the contents of that writing.

事实上，我们欢迎您事后撕毁或删除该文档，并且您当然希望将其存储在安全的地方，这样它就不会落入您不希望看到该内容内容的人手中。

The other thing to keep in mind is that while it's been demonstrated over and over again that over time, these bouts of writing lead to improvements in mental and physical health, as we talked about earlier, it is very normal and in fact quite likely that one will feel pretty activated in the negative sense, that one will feel somewhat low, depressed, angry, sad immediately after finishing one of these bouts of writing, especially if you fall into the high expressor category.

另一件要记住的事情是，虽然已经一再证明，随着时间的推移，这些间歇性写作会带来心理和身体健康的改善，正如我们之前谈到的，这是非常正常的，事实上，人们很可能会在消极意义上感到非常活跃，在完成其中一场写作后，人们会立即感到有些低落、沮丧、愤怒、悲伤，特别是如果你属于高表达者类别。

So it's important that, as we mentioned earlier, that you have a buffer of time after which you complete the writing before moving into your other day's events.

因此，正如我们之前提到的，重要的是，您需要有一段缓冲时间，然后再完成写作，然后再开始另一天的活动。

I also just personally wouldn't recommend that you do this writing exercise just prior to trying to go to sleep at night if the experience is especially stressful or traumatic.

如果经历特别有压力或创伤，我个人也不建议您在晚上睡觉前进行此写作练习。

And by definition, the writing exercise focuses on stressful and traumatic events.

根据定义，写作练习的重点是压力和创伤事件。

So keep that in mind as well.

所以也请记住这一点。

And then as a final point, but certainly a significant one, is to keep in mind that if this writing protocol is creating in you significant enough amounts of stress, either psychological or physical, that you simply don't want to do it or that it's impeding other areas of life, by all means, just stop.

最后一点，但肯定是重要的一点，是要记住，如果这个写作协议给你带来了足够大的压力，无论是心理上的还是身体上的，你根本不想这样做，或者它妨碍了生活的其他领域，无论如何，就停止吧。

Okay?

好的？

There was very little, if any, data within the papers that I read that indicated that people had to be removed from the study for this reason.

我读到的论文中几乎没有数据表明人们必须因此而被从研究中剔除。

But keep in mind that we're talking about purposefully delving into stressful or traumatic experiences and writing about them in some detail, so it stands to reason that some people might not be able to tolerate that.

但请记住，我们正在谈论有目的地深入研究压力或创伤经历，并详细地写下它们，所以按理说，有些人可能无法忍受这一点。

And I want to strongly request that before anyone embark on this writing protocol, that you ask yourself whether or not you are indeed prepared to deal with the emotional state that might accompany faithful, accurate recollection of what happened, what you felt, and any links or experiences a full four times across the protocol.

我想强烈要求任何人在开始这个写作协议之前，问问自己是否真的准备好处理可能伴随着忠实、准确地回忆发生的事情、你的感受以及整个协议中的任何链接或经历的四次的情绪状态。

I also see no reason why you couldn't do this protocol for something that wasn't the most stressful or traumatic event in your life, but rather take your first pass at this protocol with something that was very stressful, maybe even traumatic, but perhaps not the most traumatic event as a way of sampling whether or not it's for you.

我也认为你没有理由不能对那些不是你生命中最有压力或创伤性事件的事情执行这个协议，而是在这个协议中第一次通过一些压力很大，甚至可能是创伤性的事件，但也许不是最创伤性的事件，作为抽样的一种方式，它是否适合你。

In fact, I plan to do that.

事实上，我也打算这么做。

In reviewing the literature and preparing for today's episode, I wrote down two things, possibly three, that I would want to write about, and then I rated them one through three, one being the most stressful, perhaps even traumatic, the other being less stressful, and the third, the least stressful of the three, and decided to go with writing about the second in that list, that is the moderately stressful, AKA traumatic event, as a way to first wade into this protocol.

在回顾文献并为今天的节目做准备时，我写下了两件事情，可能是三件，我想写的，然后我对它们进行了从一到三的评级，其中一件是压力最大的，甚至可能是创伤性的，另一件是压力较小的，第三件是三者中压力最小的，并决定继续写该列表中的第二件，即中等压力，又称创伤性事件，作为首先涉足该协议的一种方式。

But I will adhere to the protocol.

但我会遵守协议。

I'm going to write about that same thing four times as opposed to switching from one event to the next midway through the protocol.

我将把同样的事情写四次，而不是在协议中途从一个事件切换到下一个事件。

So I am going to adhere to the protocol.

所以我将遵守协议。

I'll certainly be happy to get back to you and let you know how it goes.

我当然很乐意回复您并让您知道进展情况。

I invite you, if you like, to embrace this protocol, to try it.

如果您愿意，我邀请您接受这个协议并尝试一下。

We've provided links to the literature that supports this protocol.

我们提供了支持该协议的文献链接。

Again, it's very rare, perhaps the first time that I've ever done an entire podcast episode about a single protocol or to formulate an entire podcast around a protocol.

再说一遍，这是非常罕见的，也许是我第一次完成关于单个协议的整个播客集或围绕一个协议制定整个播客。

But frankly, I don't look at this protocol from Pennebaker and colleagues as just a protocol.

但坦率地说，我并不认为 Pennebaker 和同事的这个协议只是一个协议。

I look at it as an entire body of literature that includes a center of massive data that all seem to point in the same direction, which is that writing about something very stressful or traumatic for 15 to 30 minutes, four times, either on consecutive days or separated out by a week between each of those four writing sessions, can produce long-lasting positive effects on mental and physical health.

我把它看作是一个完整的文学体系，其中包括一个海量数据的中心，这些数据似乎都指向同一个方向，那就是，用 15 到 30 分钟、连续四次写一些非常有压力或痛苦的事情，无论是连续几天还是在这四次写作之间间隔一周，都可以对身心健康产生持久的积极影响。

And to me, that's a protocol that is simply too valuable to overlook and simply too valuable to not share with you.

对我来说，这是一个非常有价值的协议，不容忽视，而且非常有价值，不容不与您分享。

If you're learning from and/or enjoying this podcast, please subscribe to our YouTube channel.

如果您正在学习和/或喜欢此播客，请订阅我们的 YouTube 频道。

That's a terrific zero-cost way to support us.

这是支持我们的绝佳零成本方式。

In addition, please subscribe to the podcast on both Spotify and Apple.

此外，请在 Spotify 和 Apple 上订阅该播客。

And on both Spotify and Apple, you can leave us up to a five-star review.

在 Spotify 和 Apple 上，您都可以给我们五星级的评价。

Please check out the sponsors mentioned at the beginning of today's episode.

请查看今天节目开头提到的赞助商。

That's the best way to support this podcast.

这是支持这个播客的最佳方式。

If you have questions for me or comments about the podcast or topics or guests that you'd like me to consider for the Huberman Lab podcast, please put those in the comments section on YouTube.

如果您对我有疑问，或者对播客有任何意见，或者您希望我为 Huberman Lab 播客考虑的主题或嘉宾，请将这些意见放入 YouTube 的评论部分。

I do read all the comments.

我确实阅读了所有评论。

Not on today's episode, but on many previous episodes of the Huberman Lab podcast, we discuss supplements.

不是在今天的节目中，而是在 Huberman Lab 播客的许多之前的节目中，我们讨论了补充剂。

While supplements aren't necessary for everybody, many people derive tremendous benefit from them for things like improving sleep, for hormone support, and for improving focus.

虽然补充剂并不是每个人都需要的，但许多人从它们中获得了巨大的好处，例如改善睡眠、激素支持和提高注意力。

To learn more about the supplements discussed on the Huberman Lab podcast, you can go to Live Momentous, spelled O-U-S, so it's livemomentous.com/huberman.

要了解有关 Huberman Lab 播客上讨论的补充剂的更多信息，您可以访问 Live Momentous，拼写为 O-U-S，即 livemomentous.com/huberman。

If you're not already following me on social media, I am hubermanlab on all social media platforms.

如果您还没有在社交媒体上关注我，我是所有社交媒体平台上的 hubermanlab。

So that's Instagram, Twitter, now called X, LinkedIn, Facebook, and Threads.

这就是 Instagram、Twitter（现在称为 X）、LinkedIn、Facebook 和 Threads。

And on all of those platforms, I discuss science and science-related tools, some of which overlap with the contents of the Huberman Lab podcast, but much of which are distinct from the contents of the Huberman Lab podcast.

在所有这些平台上，我讨论科学和与科学相关的工具，其中一些与胡伯曼实验室播客的内容重叠，但其中大部分与胡伯曼实验室播客的内容不同。

So again, it's hubermanlab on all social media platforms.

再说一遍，所有社交媒体平台上都是 hubermanlab。

If you haven't already subscribed to our Neural Network Newsletter, the Neural Network Newsletter is a monthly newsletter that's completely zero cost that includes podcast summaries as well as toolkits.

如果您还没有订阅我们的神经网络时事通讯，神经网络时事通讯是完全零成本的月度时事通讯，其中包括播客摘要和工具包。

Toolkits are brief PDFs that describe protocols for things like neuroplasticity, for improving your sleep, for dopamine regulation, for exercise, flexibility, and on and on.

工具包是简短的 PDF，描述了神经可塑性、改善睡眠、多巴胺调节、锻炼、灵活性等方面的协议。

Again, all completely zero cost.

再次强调，一切完全零成本。

To sign up for the Neural Network Newsletter, you simply go to hubermanlab.com, go to the Menu tab, scroll down to Newsletter, and put your email there.

要注册神经网络新闻通讯，您只需访问 hubermanlab.com，转到“菜单”选项卡，向下滚动到新闻通讯，然后将您的电子邮件放在那里。

You'll receive an email, and if you approve, you'll start receiving the monthly newsletter.

您将收到一封电子邮件，如果您批准，您将开始接收每月通讯。

Again, it's completely zero cost, and I want to point out that we do not share your email with anybody.

再次强调，这完全是零成本，而且我想指出的是，我们不会与任何人分享您的电子邮件。

Thank you for joining for today's episode where we discussed a journaling protocol that has been demonstrated in the scientific literature to significantly improve mental and physical health.

感谢您参加今天的节目，我们讨论了一种日记协议，该协议已在科学文献中证明可以显着改善身心健康。

And last but certainly not least, thank you for your interest in science.

最后但并非最不重要的一点是，感谢您对科学的兴趣。