英语阅读：要做的事太多,时间总是不够？

2021年1月26日发(作者：ticktack)
When you've got a daunting list of tasks that need to be done, time can seem to
flash past in the blink of an eye.
And now a study has found that having goals that are in conflict - such as working
late to impress the boss and making time for your family - can make time seem to
pass even quicker.
The researchers say being under pressure can lead to anxiety and make us think we
are short on time - but reducing stress could be a solution.
In fact, simply breathing deeply and saying 'I'm excited' was found to improve a
person's coping skills and slow down a person's perception of time.

The research was carried out by Professor Jordan Etkin from the Fuqua School of
Business at Duke University in Durham, North Carolina.
With her colleagues she looked at what makes us feel pressed for time, and how that
affects our behaviour.
Managing things on your to-do list, and thus your work-life balance, can often make
time seem to pass extremely quickly.
The conclusion was that having goals in conflict, such as perceiving exercise to get in
the way of family time, made people anxious, leading them to think they were short
on time.

As a solution to the problem, Professor Etkin and her colleagues said breathing
exercises could restore people's sense of time.
In the experiment half of participants that had said they had conflicting goals were
told to take 11 seconds over a breath, while the other half who did not were told
simply to count to 11.
The slow breathers reported less anxiety and a longer view of time than the counting
group.
Similarly, conflicted subjects told to repeat aloud 'I am excited!' also reported that
they felt like they had more time available.
'Goal conflict is often about perception,' Professor Etkin said.
'In many situations, we don't have to feel that conflict. The simple tactics identified
in my research can help manage that experience.'
In their experiments, Professor Etkin and her colleagues studied people who saw
their goals as competing, and those who saw little conflict.
In the first experiment, subjects were asked to list two goals that were 'in conflict
with one another,' while a control group listed two goals with no mention of conflict.
Then the researchers recorded their perceptions of available time. Participants who
considered conflicting goals felt they had less time. This held true regardless of
whether the conflict involved money or time.