The DOI matches its Crossref record; 6 of the 6 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Foreign-Language Effect: Thinking in a Foreign Tongue Reduces Decision Biases
Abstract
Would you make the same decisions in a foreign language as you would in your native tongue? It may be intuitive that people would make the same choices regardless of the language they are using, or that the difficulty of using a foreign language would make decisions less systematic. We discovered, however, that the opposite is true: Using a foreign language reduces decision-making biases. Four experiments show that the framing effect disappears when choices are presented in a foreign tongue. Whereas people were risk averse for gains and risk seeking for losses when choices were presented in their native tongue, they were not influenced by this framing manipulation in a foreign language. Two additional experiments show that using a foreign language reduces loss aversion, increasing the acceptance of both hypothetical and real bets with positive expected value. We propose that these effects arise because a foreign language provides greater cognitive and emotional distance than a native tongue does.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Prospect Theory: An Analysis of Decision under Risk
Kahneman, D., & Tversky, A. (1979) · Econometrica · doi:10.2307/1914185 · Cited by 48,524
Back-translation for cross-cultural research.
Brislin, R. W. (1970) · Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology · doi:10.1177/135910457000100301 · Cited by 14,091
A perspective on judgment and choice: mapping bounded rationality.
Kahneman, D. (2003) · American Psychologist · doi:10.1037/0003-066x.58.9.697 · Cited by 5,540
Running experiments on Amazon Mechanical Turk
Paolacci, G., Chandler, J., & Ipeirotis, P. G. (2010) · Judgment and Decision Making · doi:10.1017/s1930297500002205 · Cited by 3,767
Overcoming intuition: Metacognitive difficulty activates analytic reasoning.
Alter, A. L., Oppenheimer, D. M., Epley, N., & Eyre, R. N. (2007) · Journal of Experimental Psychology: General · doi:10.1037/0096-3445.136.4.569 · Cited by 844
Frames and brains: elicitation and control of response tendencies
Kahneman, D., & Frederick, S. (2007) · Trends in Cognitive Sciences · doi:10.1016/j.tics.2006.11.007 · Cited by 260
Cited by
Brannen, M. Y., Piekkari, R., & Tietze, S. (2014) · Journal of International Business Studies · doi:10.1057/jibs.2014.24 · Cited by 289
Antons, D., & Piller, F. T. (2015) · Academy of Management Perspectives · doi:10.5465/amp.2013.0091 · Cited by 289
Emotionality Differences Between a Native and Foreign Language: Implications for Everyday Life
Caldwell-Harris, C. L. (2015) · Current Directions in Psychological Science · doi:10.1177/0963721414566268 · Cited by 156
Reber, R., & Greifeneder, R. (2017) · Educational Psychologist · doi:10.1080/00461520.2016.1258173 · Cited by 87
Moral judgement in early bilinguals: Language dominance influences responses to moral dilemmas
Wong, G., & Ng, B. C. (2018) · Frontiers in Psychology · doi:10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01070 · Cited by 31
Metadata
- Authors
- Keysar, B., Hayakawa, S. L., & An, S. G.
- Venue
- Psychological Science
- Publisher
- SAGE Publications
- Published
- 2012-04-18
- Volume
- 23
- Issue
- 6
- Pages
- 661-668
- ISSN
- 0956-7976 (ISSN-L)
- 1467-9280
- OpenAlex
- W2101467160
- Cited by
- 626
- References
- 6
- FWCI
- 17.50
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.