最新研究表明 一夫一妻制未必最合理
The idea that monogamy is 'the only way' has long been ingrained in Western culture.
在西方文化中，一夫一妻制是“唯一的方法”這個觀念早已根深蒂固。
While scientists have questioned whether this way of life truly is better than non-monogamy, they've yet to reach a consensus – and, new research argues that this is because even scientists have upheld an 'invisible' bias on the subject.
雖然科學家們已經質疑這種制度是否真的要優于非一夫一妻制，但是他們從未達成共識--而且最新一項研究表明，這是因為甚至科學家們都對這個問題抱有“看不見”的偏見。
In the study, researchers reviewed of several earlier works and surveyed more than 2,000 people, and found that non-monogamous relationships are just as 'functional' as traditional ones.
在這項研究中，研究人員們回顧了之前幾份研究、并對2000多人進行了調查，發現非一夫一妻制關系和傳統一夫一妻制在“功能”上是一樣的。
Of the group surveyed in the new study from the University of Michigan, 617 participants were in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships, according to Quartz.
據Quartz表示，在接受這項由密歇根大學研究所發起的調查的人當中，其中有617人處于自愿的非一夫一妻制關系中。
The researchers measured for trust, jealousy, passion, and overall satisfaction, and found that there were no differences in how the relationships function.
研究人員們衡量了信任、嫉妒、激情和總體滿意度等指標，發現非一夫一妻制在功能上和一夫一妻制沒有區別。
Still, non-monogamy remains somewhat taboo, and the researchers say the cultural dominance of more traditional relationships could be effecting the way intimacy is studied.
不過，非一夫一妻制仍然帶有禁忌的味道，而研究人員則表示，傳統一夫一妻制占優的主流文化可能影響了他們的研究方式。
In earlier studies, the researchers suspect scientists may have unconsciously skewed their results by using non-neutral rhetoric, among other influencers.
在之前的研究中，研究人員懷疑科學家們可能無意識地扭曲了他們的結果--包括使用一些非中性的辭藻以及其他影響因素。
Academic surveys often use phrases such as 'offended party,' or 'betrayed partner,' along with 'infidelity' and 'cheating.'
學術調查經常使用類似于“冒犯者”和“背叛者”，以及“不忠”和“欺騙”等詞匯。
Such terms are directive, the researchers argue, and can sway the outcome of the study by making it more likely for monogamy to receive higher 'scores.'
研究人員認為這些詞匯具有導向意義，可能會歪曲研究的結果，使得一夫一妻制更能得到“高分”。
'The fact that we can allow our discussion to be so emotionally led probably doesn't allow us to really think in a logical manner,' lead author Terri Conley told Quartz.
主要作者泰瑞·康利向Quartz透露：“事實上，如果我們如此情緒化地來討論這個問題，那我么可能就不能以一個合乎邏輯的方式來真正的思考。”
The idea that monogamy is 'the only way' has long been ingrained in Western culture.
在西方文化中，一夫一妻制是“唯一的方法”這個觀念早已根深蒂固。
While scientists have questioned whether this way of life truly is better than non-monogamy, they've yet to reach a consensus – and, new research argues that this is because even scientists have upheld an 'invisible' bias on the subject.
雖然科學家們已經質疑這種制度是否真的要優于非一夫一妻制，但是他們從未達成共識--而且最新一項研究表明，這是因為甚至科學家們都對這個問題抱有“看不見”的偏見。
In the study, researchers reviewed of several earlier works and surveyed more than 2,000 people, and found that non-monogamous relationships are just as 'functional' as traditional ones.
在這項研究中，研究人員們回顧了之前幾份研究、并對2000多人進行了調查，發現非一夫一妻制關系和傳統一夫一妻制在“功能”上是一樣的。
Of the group surveyed in the new study from the University of Michigan, 617 participants were in consensual non-monogamous (CNM) relationships, according to Quartz.
據Quartz表示，在接受這項由密歇根大學研究所發起的調查的人當中，其中有617人處于自愿的非一夫一妻制關系中。
The researchers measured for trust, jealousy, passion, and overall satisfaction, and found that there were no differences in how the relationships function.
研究人員們衡量了信任、嫉妒、激情和總體滿意度等指標，發現非一夫一妻制在功能上和一夫一妻制沒有區別。
Still, non-monogamy remains somewhat taboo, and the researchers say the cultural dominance of more traditional relationships could be effecting the way intimacy is studied.
不過，非一夫一妻制仍然帶有禁忌的味道，而研究人員則表示，傳統一夫一妻制占優的主流文化可能影響了他們的研究方式。
In earlier studies, the researchers suspect scientists may have unconsciously skewed their results by using non-neutral rhetoric, among other influencers.
在之前的研究中，研究人員懷疑科學家們可能無意識地扭曲了他們的結果--包括使用一些非中性的辭藻以及其他影響因素。
Academic surveys often use phrases such as 'offended party,' or 'betrayed partner,' along with 'infidelity' and 'cheating.'
學術調查經常使用類似于“冒犯者”和“背叛者”，以及“不忠”和“欺騙”等詞匯。
Such terms are directive, the researchers argue, and can sway the outcome of the study by making it more likely for monogamy to receive higher 'scores.'
研究人員認為這些詞匯具有導向意義，可能會歪曲研究的結果，使得一夫一妻制更能得到“高分”。
'The fact that we can allow our discussion to be so emotionally led probably doesn't allow us to really think in a logical manner,' lead author Terri Conley told Quartz.
主要作者泰瑞·康利向Quartz透露：“事實上，如果我們如此情緒化地來討論這個問題，那我么可能就不能以一個合乎邏輯的方式來真正的思考。”
