They are good for us, apparently. From the immune system to the health benefits to the souls, animals make us lead happier lives, or so the research goes.
显然，它们对我们有好处。 研究表明，从免疫系统到灵魂的健康益处，动物让我们过上更幸福的生活。
One Harvard study boldly claims that “pet owners are less likely to die, [reducing] a person’s mortality rate by 24 percent”. So in the interests of becoming 24 percent more immortal, opening your home to a non-human co-habitant seems to be the way forward.
哈佛大学的一项研究大胆地声称“宠物主人死亡的可能性较小，[降低]一个人的死亡率为24%”。 因此，为了变得更不朽24%，向非人类同居者开放你的家似乎是前进的道路。
Just speak to any pet owner you know.
和你认识的任何宠物主人谈谈。
Some of them, like me, might shout at their non-human companions from time to time, for barking at the doorbell as if the axeiest of murderers was stood upon the doorstep, instead of the beleaguered Fresh Hippo delivery person.
他们中的一些人，比如我，可能会不时地对他们的非人类同伴大喊大叫，因为他们对着门铃吠叫，好像最狡猾的杀人犯站在门口，而不是被困的Fresh Hippo送货员。
Some of them might throw their hands up in despair when their cat awakens them in the dead of night, three millimetres from their face, meowing plaintively for meal number 17 of whatever schedule it is that compels Pushkins to eat ceaselessly. Some even might bemoan the hair, the stench or the chaos that abounds when sharing their home with impulsive, delightful energy bombs.
当他们的猫在夜深人间叫醒他们时，他们中的一些人可能会绝望地举起双手，离他们的脸三毫米，哀怨地喵喵叫着，不管是什么时间表，迫使普希金斯不停地进食。 有些人甚至可能会用冲动、令人愉悦的能量炸弹分享他们的家时，会暎暓头发、臭味或混乱。
But I have yet to meet a pet owner who didn’t adore their companion to the limits of acceptability.
但我还没有遇到过一个宠物主人，他不爱他们的伴侣到可接受的极限。
There are several reasons for this; first and foremost because little creatures, and their foibles are ineffably cute, even if they are effably annoying at times. More interesting, however, are the studies that support the humorous observations that pet owners often look like their furry friends.
这有几个原因；首先是因为小动物，它们的毛病是难以言喻的可爱，即使它们有时非常令人讨厌。 然而，更有趣的是，一些研究支持了幽默的观察，即宠物主人经常看起来像他们的毛茸茸的朋友。
We all know someone whose beloved pooch is the head cut off them, even if we haven’t consciously thought it until now.
我们都认识一个人，他心爱的小狗被砍掉了头，即使我们直到现在才有意识地想到。
This is known as the mere exposure effect, which states that humans have a sub-conscious predisposition for a stimulus as result of a repeated exposure. Sort of like Stockholm Syndrome, but for pets, or anything else.
这被称为纯粹的暴露效应，它指出，由于反复暴露，人类有潜意识的刺激倾向。 有点像斯德哥尔摩综合症，但适用于宠物或其他任何东西。
Identified in 1968 by Robert B. Zajonc, the mere-exposure effect states that because we are so used to seeing our own reflection, our choice of pets is therefore influenced by our very visage.
Robert B. Zajonc在1968年确定，仅暴露效应表明，由于我们习惯于看到自己的倒影，我们对宠物的选择因此受到我们外表的影响。
Inception Pet-cion. Check out David Bowie and Max, Michelle Obama and Bo, or Ryan Gosling (a.k.a. Ken) and his dearly-departed George.
开始的宠物。 看看David Bowie和Max、Michelle Obama和Bo，或者Ryan Gosling（又名 肯）和他离世的乔治。
More broadly, it means that as a species, we are more disposed to the familiar, in whatever circumstances, than the novel. I lived for 3 entire years in Spain without trying a morsel of octopus, which is downright laughable now considering the showdowns there this summer whenever a plate of delicious, yummy tentacles appeared before us. Harsh words were said. We couldn’t go back to the very first place we ordered it after nearly 4 long years. I’m sure there were whispers around the village. Repeated exposure to the gelatinous, tender tentacles explains the frenzy with which we devoured kilos of our cephalopod friends this summer.
更广泛地说，这意味着作为一个物种，在任何情况下，我们都比小说更倾向于熟悉的事物。 我在西班牙生活了整整3年，没有尝过一口章鱼，考虑到今年夏天那里的摊牌，每当一盘美味可口的触手出现在我们面前时，这完全是可笑的。 說了刺眼的话。 近4年后，我们无法回到最初订购的地方。 我确信村子周围有窃窃私语。 反复接触胶质、柔软的触角解释了今年夏天我们疯狂吞噬了千公斤头足类动物朋友的原因。
No further proof is needed in my mind.
我心中不需要进一步的证明。
But in case you are still curious, here’s the lowdown from the psychology world. The mere exposure effect, whilst occurring because of repeated, well, exposure, to a stimulus, may not even be conscious.
但如果你仍然好奇，以下是心理学界的底細。 纯粹的暴露效应，虽然因为反复暴露于刺激而发生，甚至可能没有意识。
It also does not rely on any positive reward or outcome, so simply more cognition, on any level, of a stimulus, is enough to create a predisposition in the mind of the beholder.
它也不依赖于任何积极的奖励或结果，因此，在任何层面上，对刺激的更多认知就足以在观察者的头脑中创造一种倾向。
So although I may have spent the first 29 exposures to Galician Octopus in a state of WT… UGGGHHHHH, somewhere in the machinations of my mind, the mere exposure effect was hatching.
因此，尽管我可能在WT的状态下度过了前29次接触加利西亚章鱼……UGGGHHHHH，在我脑海中的某个地方，只是暴露效应正在孵化。
Zajonc had participants read foreign words aloud, with varying repetitions, and later rate them for connotative meaning. Participants consistently voted the words that had been repeated the most as the highest in terms of positive connotation. This finding seems to apply equally across the fields of advertising, entertainment, restaurant menus, life partners and pets. And everything else in between.
Zajonc让参与者大声朗读外来单词，重复次数不同，然后对它们的内涵进行评分。 就积极内涵而言，参与者始终将重复最多的词语投票为最高。 这一发现似乎同样适用于广告、娱乐、餐厅菜单、生活伴侣和宠物等领域。 以及介于两者之间的其他一切。
Perceptual fluency explains this urge to eschew the unknown, hence the burger and pizza appearance on many menus of otherwise-specialty restaurants. It’s a very much “better the devil you know” scenario. If you’ve ever rewatched a series or movie, or re-read a book instead of embarking upon a new cognitive adventure, the mere exposure effect may be subtly guiding your radar. The reduced uncertainty hinges upon the Darwinian imperative to distrust that which is new or unknown.
感知流畅性解释了这种回避未知事物的冲动，因此汉堡和披萨出现在许多特色餐厅的菜单上。 这是一个非常“你知道的更好的魔鬼”的场景。 如果你曾经重看过一部电视剧或电影，或者重读一本书，而不是开始新的认知冒险，那么只是曝光效应可能会巧妙地引导你的雷达。 不确定性的减少取决于达尔文的当务之急，即不信任新事物或未知的东西。
And in fairness, with good reason. If a person has never gobbled down a plate of tentacles before, a reasonable amount of aversion is to be expected.
公平地说，有充分的理由。 如果一个人以前从未狼吞虎咽过一盘触角，那么可以预期会有合理的厌恶。
That said, the fact that my pets might look like me because I like the cut of their jib, ergo, my own jib, still remains puzzling, more so because two of them are chihuahuas and one best resembles an Irish Wolfhound with the legs of a terrier. Where to even begin?
也就是说，事实上，我的宠物可能看起来像我，因为我喜欢它们的吊臂剪裁，因此，我自己的吊臂，仍然令人费解，更是如此，因为其中两只是吉娃娃，其中一只最像一只有梗犬腿的爱尔兰狼猎犬。 从哪里开始？
Is it their rabid intent to bark the fear of dog into visitors? Their desire to sleep in the sun? The urge to eat anything and everything forbidden? Or do I, like Bowie and Obama, and Gosling, actually look like my pets? Maybe I do have the subtle air of a Mexican ratter, or a mongrel Irish Terrier adorable doofus. Maybe I look like an incompetent assassin like my cat, the noisiest creature to ever spawn on this great earth.
是他们向游客发出对狗的恐惧的狂热意图吗？ 他们渴望在阳光下睡觉？ 吃任何被禁止的东西的冲动？ 还是我，像鲍伊、奥巴马和戈斯林一样，真的看起来像我的宠物？ 也許我確實有墨西哥響尾蛇或愛爾蘭梗犬可愛的笨蛋的微妙氣息。 也許我看起来像我的猫，就像我的猫一样，是地球上最嚯��亂的生物。
Or maybe the mere exposure effect in our menagerie exerts itself more on the conceptual side in this case. Our little furry friends were all lost, without a safe place to be themselves. Our first and most vocal member of our furry family wasn’t even able to stand up when we brought her home. She keeled over and then slept for so long we quite reasonably thought she had died. Now, 5 years later, we have affectionately nicknamed her, “Chunk”, and if she ever falls over, it’s from overindulgence.
或者，在这种情况下，我们的menagerie中的单独曝光效应更多地表现在概念方面。 我们的毛茸茸的小伙伴们都迷路了，没有安全的地方。 當我們把她帶回家時，她甚至無法站起來，這是我們毛茸茸的家庭中第一個也是最能說話的成員。 她昏昏沉沉，然后睡了这么久，我们很合理地认为她已经死了。 现在，5年后，我们亲切地给她起了个绰号“Chunk”，如果她摔倒了，那是因为过度放纵。
We live in a city of flux, elastic in its permanence. There are always furry friends who need a safe place to be. Every single time my children came home with some scrawny waif to foster, I said absolutely, most definitely no. And yet here we are. Three dogs, one cat, very nearly two fostered kittens. When the Barkapocalypse occurs, I curse their souls for all eternity.
我们生活在一个流动的城市，永久性是有弹性的。 总有一些毛茸茸的朋友需要一个安全的地方。 每次我的孩子带着一些瘦弱的女人回家要寄养时，我都说绝对，绝对不。 然而，我们在这里。 三只狗，一只猫，几乎两只寄养的小猫。 当吠叫启示录发生时，我永远诅咒他们的灵魂。
But like my tentacled delicacy, repeated exposure means that most certainly I would stab you with a toothpick for looking crossways at them.
但就像我的触角美食一样，反复暴露意味着我肯定会用牙签刺伤你，因为你斜着它们。