Search

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions: Extant research suggests that processing information in a second language (L2) affects decision-making, possibly by affecting metacognition. We hypothesized that processing in L2 will reduce the bias blind spot effect, whereby people (on average) erroneously think that they are less susceptible to biases than others. Design/methodology/approach: In Experiment 1, participants assessed their susceptibility and the susceptibility of others to 13 psychological and 7 economic biases, in either L1 (Polish) or L2 (English). In Experiment 2, participants assessed the 7 most severe bias blind spots from Experiment 1. Data and analysis: We recruited 500 participants for each experiment via Prolific (832 overall, after exclusions). The main hypothesis and moderators were tested via mixed-model regressions. Findings/conclusions: In Experiment 1, participants showed an overall bias blind spot, which decreased in the L2 condition, but only for psychological biases. In Experiment 2, we replicated the L2-bias blind spot attenuation effect. An exploratory analysis suggests that the effect of L2 is the result of both lower ratings of other-susceptibility and higher ratings of self-susceptibility. Originality: Our study provides unique insights into how L2 affects metacognition. We are the first to study how the use of L2 can attenuate the bias blind spot. Our findings provide rare support for the psychological distancing ("birds-eye view") explanation for the foreign language effect. Significance/implications: Bilinguals using L2 showed some resilience to the bias blind spot, suggesting metacognition is language dependent. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Debiasing is a method of improving people's decisions by reducing their reliance on salient intuitions causing them to behave suboptimally or biasedly. However, many of the known debiasing techniques have limited effectiveness or can only remedy a one-shot decision, rather than having a lasting impact. In this work, I focus on the role of metacognition in debiasing decision-making and discuss how it can be better understood through the lens of the foreign language effect. The foreign language effect suggests that using a foreign language can sometimes benefit people's decision-making without providing them with additional information or instructions regarding the task. However, we do not fully understand how the foreign language effect works and its limitations. I conclude by urging scientists to research this effect with the hope of having a lasting positive impact on society. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Intertemporal choice requires one to decide between smaller sooner and larger later payoffs and is captured by discount rates. Across two preregistered experiments testing three language pairs (Polish vs. English, Spanish, and German; Experiment 1) and with incentivized participants (Experiment 2), we found no evidence that using a foreign language decreased the strength or increased the consistency of intertemporal choices. On the contrary, there was some evidence of stronger discounting when a foreign language was used. We confirmed prior findings that more reflective individuals discount less strongly but observed that they were just as (un)affected by using foreign language as less reflective individuals. Thus, we provide preliminary evidence that the foreign language effect is robust to individual differences in cognitive reflection. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

People's judgements and decisions often change when made in their foreign language. Existing research testing this foreign language effect has predominantly used text-based stimuli with little research focusing on the impact of listening to audio stimuli on the effect. The only existing study on this topic found shifts in people's moral decisions only in the audio modality. First, by reanalysing the data from this previous study and by collecting data in an additional experiment, we found no consistent effects of using foreign language on moral judgements. Second, in both data sets, we found no significant language by modality interaction. Overall, our results highlight the need for more robust testing of the foreign language effect, and its boundary conditions. However, modality of presentation does not appear to be a candidate for explaining its variability. Data and materials for this experiment are available at https://osf.io/qbjxn/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bilinguals who consider moral problems in their foreign language tend to endorse causing harm to others if that leads to good outcomes more than they do in their native language. Čavar and Tytus [2018. "Moral Judgement and Foreign Language Effect: When the Foreign Language Becomes the Second Language." Journal of Multilingual and Multicultural Development 39 (1): 17–28] reported that this effect disappears when the decision maker is highly acculturated. We challenge the latter conclusion. Specifically, the experiment reported by Čavar and Tytus (2018) utilised unvalidated and potentially unreliable materials, was underpowered, and lacked a control group. Moreover, a re-analysis of their statistical test shows that it fails to convincingly support the reported null finding. We conclude that further examination of the moral foreign language effect is needed to test its boundaries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Bilinguals, in their foreign language, are spared from several decision-making biases. We examined this "Foreign Language Effect" in the context of logical reasoning, in which reasoners are required to track the logical status of a syllogism, ignoring its believability. Across three experiments, we found the reverse Foreign Language Effect; foreign language reasoners are less able to evaluate the logical structure of syllogisms, but no less biased by their believability. One path to succeeding in reasoning tasks is always engaging in reflective processing. A more efficient strategy is metacognitively tracking whether belief-based intuitions conflict with logic-based intuitions and only reflecting when such conflict is present. We provide evidence that foreign language reasoners are less accurate because they struggle to detect belief-logic conflict, and in turn fail to engage in reflective processing when necessary to override the incorrect, intuitive response. We propose that foreign language reasoners are less able to detect belief-logic conflict either due to weakened intuitions or due to a more conservative threshold for the detection of conflict between multiple competing intuitions. Data for the experiments can be accessed publicly at https://osf.io/phbuq/. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to the principle of utilitarianism, the moral status of an action depends on its consequences for the greater good; the principle of deontology states that the moral status of an action depends on its consistency with moral norms. Previous research suggests that processing moral dilemmas in a foreign language influences utilitarian and deontological response tendencies. However, because the two kinds of moral inclinations were confounded with general action tendencies, it remains unclear whether language effects on moral judgments reflect genuine differences in people's sensitivity to consequences and norms, or broader differences in general action tendencies regardless of consequences and norms. Using the CNI model of moral decision-making, the current research (N = 634) demonstrates that foreign language reduces sensitivity to consequences and sensitivity to norms without affecting general action tendencies. Implications for moral choices in international contexts and language effects on decision-making are discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Using a foreign language is suggested to affect how we think, even reducing bias. However, the exact mechanisms of its influence are still unknown. In this project, we tested two variants of the “thinking more” mechanism driving the foreign language effect: increased cognitive reflection and greater task engagement.We analyzed previously collected data from five experiments employing the Cognitive Reflection Test (CRT) and/or the Berlin Numeracy Test (BNT), each administered in the native or foreign language. If the increased reflection explanation is true, the CRT score should be higher in participants using a foreign language. If the greater task engagement explanation is true, the BNT score should be higher in participants using a foreign language.We report data from N = 1,288 participants who filled the CRT and N = 413 who filled the BNT. Data were analyzed using the NHST approach and its Bayesian alternative over a spectrum of liberal, default, and conservative priors. Data are publicly available at https://osf.io/m8tn9All the test results were nonsignificant and showed anecdotal to strong evidence that neither the CRT nor the BNT scores improved in the foreign language condition, also when controlling for proficiency. The proportion of intuitive to computational errors was also unaffected.We are the first to comprehensively test the thinking-more explanation of the foreign language effect.Our results undermine the claim that using a foreign language promotes more cognitive reflection or engagement. The foreign language effect likely has a different cause. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]