Search

Purpose and research question: This review investigates the influence of the foreign language effect (FLE) on moral decision-making, risk aversion, and causality perception. Recent research indicates that bilinguals employ different decision-making strategies according to the language in use (first vs. second language). Methodology: Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) protocol, we conducted a comprehensive literature review. Our analysis focused on empirical studies, yielding 28 articles that met our inclusion criteria. Findings and conclusions: Our findings reveal that participants, when operating in a foreign language context, are more inclined to accept harm for improved outcomes, exhibit reduced risk aversion, and display moderated causal perceptions, particularly in emotionally charged contexts. The variability in study conclusions can be attributed to factors such as age, personality, language proficiency, and linguistic characteristics. Significance: Our results support previous findings in the FLE, highlight limitations, and provide suggestions for future research. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The moral foreign-language effect (MFLE) suggests biases present when making moral decisions in the native language are not present in the foreign language. However, the literature using explicit dilemmas shows inconsistent findings. The present study investigates whether MFLE has its origin in the reduced emotion hypothesis. Instead of the typically employed explicit paradigms, we utilize an implicit paradigm, avoiding conscious processing. Chinese–English bilinguals completed an implicit association test (Experiment 1) and an evaluative priming task (Experiment 2) in their native (L1: Chinese) and second language (L2: English). Both experiments found consistent evidence that the self–other moral bias was only observed in the native language. Therefore, we propose that the MFLE has its origin during the automatic associative stage. It results from the reduced emotional reaction in a foreign compared to the native language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Communication in English can generate disproportionate reactions in relation to the real context of the situations, if the messages are not correctly understood, for reasons related to the good knowledge of this language. A sociological experiment of written remote negotiation researched the modification of the perceptions of hostility, of the satisfaction and of the reactions in the negotiation through messages written in English, in which are used some false friends common to many European languages, including Romanian language. The experiment demonstrated that the perceptions and reactions in the negotiation in English of a native Romanian speaker are influenced by the correct understanding of the meaning of words like false friends. Misunderstandings can lead to misperceptions about the hostility of messages received in English, and reactions may become unjustified by increased aggression, in disharmony with the correct negotiation context. The interest of the study may be larger, because the chosen keywords are known as false friends in many European languages. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

When negotiating with partners from abroad, which language should we choose: a native or a foreign one? To answer this question, we leverage dual‐process theory to investigate how using a native versus foreign language affects negotiation strategies and outcomes and explore the moderating role of emotions. Across three studies that use dual‐language speakers of four of the five most common languages in the world (English, Chinese, Spanish and French), our findings consistently show that, while the native language is the preferred option for negotiation (Study 1), the consequences are more emotional expression, more passive strategies and worse outcomes (Studies 2 and 3). Anger in a native versus foreign language makes negotiators compromise more, which results in worse outcomes (Study 3). Our contribution is threefold: We are the first to explore the effects of language (foreign vs. native) in an empirical negotiation setting; we separate the intrapersonal from the interpersonal effects of language by using the Actor‐Partner Interdependence Model; and we establish that the language effects are independent of culture. Our results suggest that managers should use their native language with caution when negotiating, since they might unconsciously display higher levels of emotion and use more passive negotiation strategies. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives/purpose/research questions: 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. Design/methodology/approach: 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. Data and analysis: 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/m8tn9 Findings/conclusions: All 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. Originality: We are the first to comprehensively test the thinking-more explanation of the foreign language effect. Significance/Implications: 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]

In China, the prevalence of academic dishonesty has attracted considerable negative attention. One explanation for observed differences is found in cultural norms around the acceptability of individual unethical academic behaviors. The establishment of international cooperative universities in China presents a unique challenge for educators and administrators due to cultural differences in practices around academic integrity. This is especially relevant in the context of Sino-American universities due to increased tolerance and decreased training concerning plagiarism in Chinese education relative to the USA. The unique academic experience of bilingual Chinese students enrolled in Sino-American universities presents an opportunity to investigate whether academic experience in English influences attitudes and behaviors around academic integrity. Drawing from research on the foreign language effect, the present study tested the hypothesis that knowledge, and by extension behavior, associated with academic integrity is bound to the English language. Mandarin-English bilingual university students (n = 106) completed both objective and self-report assessments of language experience and responded to two dilemmas designed to mirror commonly experienced academic scenarios presented in either Mandarin or English. We identified a modulatory role of English proficiency with higher levels associated with a lower likelihood of academically dishonest behavior. Additional findings support that separable dimensions of English experience interact to modulate responses to academic dilemmas. Findings suggest that higher levels of English proficiency may reflect higher access to Western norms around academic integrity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A growing body of research has provided evidence for the foreign language effect on thinking, notably decision-making. Our prior work found reduction of recency effect following positive feedback in a foreign language as compared to the native tongue during even-probability gambling. However, the fundamental mechanisms underlying this effect remain unclear. The present study, therefore, aims to probe into this by engaging Chinese-English bilinguals in a functional magnetic resonance imaging version of our gambling task, which required participants to make decisions between playing and leaving equal-odds bets whilst manipulating language and valence of feedback. Results showed fewer 'play' choices following positive feedback presented in English relative to Chinese while no cross-language differences were observed after negative feedback. This valence-dependent language effect on risk-taking behaviour was supported by a language-emotion-decision neural circuit involving interplay between the right lingual gyrus, left fusiform gyrus, and right inferior frontal gyrus. Overall, our findings suggest valence-differential mechanisms of the foreign language effect in the risky decision. That is, the use of a foreign language in feedback presentation attenuates emotional reaction to positive feedback and thus diminishes subsequent risk-taking behaviour. Differently, negative counterparts seem to trigger detachment from negative emotion, leading to dissociation between feedback-encoding and decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has shown that moral choice depends on language, a phenomenon known as the moral foreign language effect (mFLE). The current study examines the influence of social distance on the mFLE. In Experiment 1, 200 participants were randomly assigned to either close or distant social distance in English or Chinese. In Experiment 2, 188 participants were randomly assigned to either English or Chinese and were presented with eight moral dilemmas, each with five different levels of social distance. After reading the dilemma, participants made a choice on a binary scale (Yes/No) in both Experiments 1 and 2 or on a more sensitive 100-point scale in Experiment 2. The results showed that the mFLE was present in distant social distance but absent in close social distance. Finally, a meta-analysis of the results from both studies confirmed the effect of social distance on the mFLE. These findings demonstrate that social distance might play an important role in moderating the mFLE in moral judgment. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Copyright of Yildiz Journal of Educational Research is the property of KARE Publishing and its content may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder's express written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use. This abstract may be abridged. No warranty is given about the accuracy of the copy. Users should refer to the original published version of the material for the full abstract. (Copyright applies to all Abstracts.)

This study investigates how the language used to present lexical stimuli influences the expression of gender biases, with a particular focus on the “Foreign Language Effect” (FLE) – the phenomenon where using a foreign language affects judgment and reasoning. Italian native speakers (N=213), English native speakers (N=105), and Italian-English bilinguals (N=192) evaluated 58 words categorized into Power, Weakness, Warmth and Coldness domains for gender connotation. Results indicated consistent stereotypical associations across languages, albeit with variable strength. Critically, participants exhibited attenuated stereotyping when assessing words in a non-native language, providing further empirical validation for the FLE. Foreign language use appears to elicit less automatic social biases, potentially due to decreased emotional activation and increased cognitive distance that occur when processing information in a less proficient language. Additionally, this reduction in stereotyping may be attributed to less exposure to and internalization of sexist language in a second language. By demonstrating the role of language in modulating bias expression, these insights have implications for understanding sociocultural perception formation and developing equitable language policies.

N/A

Judging the perspective of others often requires ignoring one's own accessible knowledge. Aging increases reliance on the most available knowledge and may decrease the adjustment of this knowledge to adopt another perspective. Using a dominant language also decreases control demands, while using a nondominant language promotes deliberation. We examined whether aging and language dominance shape the way in which individuals judge someone else's interpretation of ambiguous messages. Russian–Hebrew bilinguals (N = 237, ages 19–80) read 20 ambiguous messages and judged how a recipient would interpret them. Half of the texts contained information that suggested that the message was sincere, and half of the texts contained information that implied that the message was sarcastic. This information was available only to the participant and should not have affected the recipient's interpretation. An egocentric bias emerged in both languages since participants could not ignore their own knowledge when judging the recipient's perspective. Aging was associated with a greater bias, but the results were similar in both languages. A second study included 60 younger (ages 18–39) and 62 older (ages 60–80) Israeli-born participants, who performed the same task as well as a flanker task (i.e., judging the direction of a central arrow flanked by congruent and incongruent distractors). Age interacted with the egocentric bias, but there was no correlation between the flanker effect and perspective judgment. Thus, decreased inhibition, as measured by the flanker task, cannot account for the egocentric bias. We suggest that the findings reflect difficulty in overriding highly accessible information, especially in older age. Public Significance Statement: This study examines whether aging and language dominance are associated with the ability to ignore one's knowledge when judging the perspective of others. The findings show a robust egocentric bias in both languages of bilingual speakers, as all participants, especially older adults, could not completely override their highly accessible knowledge when judging the perspective of others. Lower sensitivity to the perspective of others can interfere with decision making and discourse comprehension. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

AbstractIn the Deese-Roediger-McDermott (DRM) paradigm, studying a list of semantically related words leads to false memory for the critical non-studied word that is related to all the words in the study list. Previous studies questioning whether bilinguals are more prone to false memory in their first language (L1) or second language (L2) in the DRM paradigm revealed mixed results. The present study investigated the same question with Turkish-English bilinguals. The revised hierarchical model proposes that the link between the lexicon and the semantic system is weaker in L2 than in L1, suggesting that false memory in the DRM paradigm that relies on semantic relatedness would be higher in L1 than in L2. Furthermore, previous studies showed that L2 is more resistant to errors in decision-making when the two languages are dissimilar, but not when they are similar, and Turkish and English are historically distant and typologically dissimilar languages. We tested Turkish-English bilingual participants whose L1 is Turkish with Turkish and English DRM word lists that had similar prior norms for generating false recognition. In the recognition test, some of the studied items and the critical non-studied items were presented and participants identified the studied items. False recognition for the critical non-studied items was lower and correct recognition for studied items was higher in L2 than in L1. The results suggest that L2 is more resistant to false memory due to its weaker lexicon and semantic system associations, at least when the two languages spoken by the bilingual are dissimilar. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Purpose: This study aims to test negotiation outcomes when bilinguals negotiate in a foreign rather than their native language. Decision research on the foreign language effect indicates that bilingual individuals may be less susceptible to framing bias when using a foreign language because they make less emotional and biased choices. With increasing international business activity, there is a pressing need to examine the effect of language on bilingual negotiators. Design/methodology/approach: The authors tested the hypotheses using a two (task frame: gain vs loss) × 2 (language: foreign vs native) factorial design recruiting 246 Korean–English bilinguals. A negotiation simulation with three issues was used, and participants exchanged offers with a preprogrammed computer they believed to be a real counterpart. Findings: There was no significant interaction effect between framing and language on the offers made, but the framing effect was mitigated and nonsignificant for negotiators who used their foreign language. The interaction between framing and language conditions significantly affected negotiators' positive emotions and satisfaction with the negotiation. Originality/value: The uniqueness of this paper is related to its effort to investigate the effect of negotiation language on a negotiator's decision-making. Considering globalization and the increasing prevalence of international negotiations, this paper has implications for researchers and practitioners. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous studies have shown that foreign languages can change people's responses to moral dilemmas, making them more likely to choose harm (e.g., to kill one individual in order to save a few lives). Regional languages have also been shown to make sacrificial choices more likely. Regional languages are typically acquired early and used routinely among family and acquaintances, thus differing from foreign languages that are typically acquired later and used rather sporadically. Using a process dissociation procedure, we show in the present study that regional and foreign languages weaken the contribution of the deontological view in similar ways. Furthermore, the effects of both languages were modulated by proficiency, so that less proficient bilinguals showed a stronger decrease of the deontological tendency. These similarities suggest that the effects induced by both languages stem from what these languages have in common. Both languages are not experienced in contexts critical in forging moral views (e.g., public institutions, media, schools). We propose that the effects of foreign and regional languages stem from the lack of experience in such contexts. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has shown that bilingual speakers may be more tolerant to ambiguity, they might perceive situations of ambiguity more interesting, challenging and desirable (e.g., Dewaele & Li, 2013). To our knowledge, no data are available addressing the question whether the language in use can have an effect on the personality trait of tolerance of ambiguity (ToA). This study investigated whether and how reading statements in a second language (L2), as opposed to the native language (L1), affects ToA. 387 Italian–English bilingual adults completed a questionnaire measuring levels of ToA either in English or Italian. Results revealed that processing information in L2 promoted higher scores of ToA overall and in sentences that were related to challenging perspectives and change. Age, gender and L2 proficiency were significant predictors of higher ToA scores. This study offers new evidence that processing information in a L2 can affect tolerance of ambiguous situations. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

We examined moral judgments in three types of language: a native national language (Italian), a non-native foreign language (English), and a native regional language (Venetian, oral and colloquial). We used the Moral Foundation Questionnaire to investigate cross-linguistic differences in multiple aspects of morality. Higher scores in the Harm, Purity and Fairness dimensions were obtained in the foreign and the regional language with respect to the national language. In addition, higher scores in the Ingroup dimension were obtained in the foreign language with respect to the native language. The effects of language on morality can thus be quite pervasive, involving a variety of aspects of morality. The differences we observed across these languages are explained in terms of their sociolinguistics – specifically, the greater use of national languages with moral values and beliefs. It is proposed that language effects arise because the language that is used activates information associated with it. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Moral cognition is an emerging field investigating the cognitive underpinnings of moral judgement and moral decision-making. Of particular interest for Cognitive Translation and Interpreting Studies (CTIS) is the impact of the use of a foreign language on the cognitive processes associated with moral decision making, what has been labeled "Foreign Language Effect" (FLE). Using a second language has been reported to reduce decision-making biases, doing away with framing effects in risk aversion settings. At the same time, moral dilemmas posed in a second language prompt more utilitarian responses than when presented in the subjects' native tongues. These results beg the following question for the CTIS scholar: does language mediation training mitigate the FLE? This paper reports on an exploratory study investigating the impact of language mediation training on the FLE. Drawing from Costa et al. (2014), 1st and 4th year, bilingual students in a Translation and Interpreting degree are presented with the trolley dilemma both in their L1, L2, and L3. Initial results seem to indicate that language mediation training might have an impact on the FLE. However, the limitations of the study suggest the need for further exploration of the intersection between language mediation training and the FLE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aim: Previous evidence suggests that language influences bilinguals' moral judgements. One explanation for this phenomenon is that using a second language (L2) attenuates emotional arousal, thus leading to more rational decisions. This study examined whether bilinguals' moral arguments and emotional vocabulary are influenced by the language – first language (L1) or L2 – in which a moral dilemma is presented. Methodology and data analysis: A mixed-methods design was employed. We analysed the emotional vocabulary used by 204 Spanish-English bilinguals when making moral judgements and expressing their emotions in response to a highly emotional moral dilemma, as well as the type of arguments they employed to justify their moral decisions in L1 and L2. Findings: The participants were more emotional in their L1, as reflected in the arguments they used to justify their decisions. This finding was supported by a significantly lower number of emotional words in their L2. Moreover, the effect of language on moral judgements was mediated by the participants' emotions. Originality: This study is the first to qualitatively examine the types of arguments underlying bilinguals' moral decision-making in their L1 and in their L2. Moreover, the analysis of verbal emotional expressions in relation to moral decisions adds to the findings of previous research that was based almost exclusively on forced-choice measures and further supports the hypothesis that the reduction of emotional arousal in an L2 modulates individuals' moral judgements. Implications: The results have implications for L2 teaching and pedagogy. The L2 curriculum should include instruction in emotional vocabulary and should engage learners in discussions that require argumentation and critical thinking about strong emotional content. This may assist bilinguals not only to express their internal affective states more efficiently, but also to experience the intensity of L2 emotionally charged words in a similar way as they do in their L1. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Emotional attenuation in a second language is believed to be one of the main causes of the Moral Foreign Language effect (MFLe). However, evidence on the mediating role of emotion in the relationship between language and moral judgements is limited and mainly derives from unrealistic moral dilemmas. We conducted two studies to investigate (1) whether the MFLe is present in both unrealistic (Study 1) and realistic (Study 2) moral dilemmas, and (2) whether this effect can be attributed to reduced emotionality. In Study 1, the MFLe was found in the moral judgements made by Spanish-English bilinguals. However, the same pattern was not observed in Greek Cypriot-English bilinguals' moral judgements, and this result was attributed to the prominent role of English in Cyprus. In Study 2, the MFLe extended to realistic moral dilemmas when the outcome of the action entailed the violation of a social norm. Study 1 and Study 2 also revealed that these bilinguals experienced a wide range of emotions in their L1 and L2, which did not differ significantly across languages. Mediation analyses further indicated that the MFLe was not mediated by emotional blunting, which made us consider alternative explanations for the MFLe. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

In two experiments, we tested whether using a foreign language attenuates neophobia at the lexical (Experiment 1) and discoursal (Experiment 2) levels in comparison to using a native language. A total of 687 native Chinese speakers participated in Experiment 1, and 693 in Experiment 2. All of them learned English as a foreign language. They performed paper-and-pencil tasks for measuring their neophobia toward innovative products described in either Chinese or English at the lexical and discoursal levels. Our results suggest that using a foreign language at the discoursal levels can obviously attenuate the neophobia toward innovative products. Moreover, Dual-process Model could explain the mechanisms of neophobic attenuation induced by foreign language use. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates whether language difference affects the readability scores of accounting narratives derived from earnings management practices in 226 companies in the UK, Spain, and Jordan from 2017 to 2021.Our analytical method applies three of the most significant readability measures based on the characteristics of each language, as well as multiple linear and logistic regression models, to demonstrate the impact of language differences on the readability of accounting narratives. The findings indicate that earnings management practices significantly affect the readability of accounting disclosures/narratives, and that past financial profitability moderates this relationship. The implications of the findings reported will help decision-makers better understand the quality and readability of accounting narratives derived from companies’ earnings management. Our analysis also has implications for how stakeholders, accounting policymakers, financial statement auditors, and academics understand the relationship between accounting reporting narratives and earnings management. First published online 17 January 2024

The Moral Foreign Language Effect (MFLE) is characterized by increased utilitarian decision-making when bilinguals respond to moral dilemmas in their foreign language. While previous research has given us a better understanding of this phenomenon, few studies have investigated how foreign language experience influences the MFLE. The present study investigated whether differences in foreign language proficiency, immersion, or dominance modulated the emergence of the MFLE. Mandarin–English bilingual young adults responded to a series of moral dilemmas in either their native or foreign language. Participants also provided ratings of permissibility and distress after reading each dilemma. We report a dilemma-specific MFLE that was modulated by differences in foreign language experience. Most significant was the observation that separable dimensions of foreign language experience interact when modulating the MFLE in a manner that is dilemma-specific. These findings emphasize the importance of considering differences in foreign language experience across multiple dimensions when investigating the MFLE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Since globalization, using second languages (L2) to make decisions about future is more common than ever. In this study, we tested the merged effect of two language features, i.e., the future-time reference (FTR) and L2, on intertemporal decision and its indirect mediators, future orientation, and subjective future perception. As a pair of languages with different FTR, English (strong-FTR) has a clear grammatical separation between present and future, while Chinese (weak-FTR) does not. Here, Chinese first language (L1) speakers made intertemporal decisions using either Chinese (L1) or English (L2). Across three studies (N = 1022) and an internal meta-analysis, we found that using a strong-FTR L2 did not change participants' intertemporal preference but did reduce their future orientation. These findings highlight a holistic perspective merging language features, outcome variables and measurement methods. These findings also imply a need for caution to use second language as nudge strategy in intertemporal decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study investigates whether language difference affects the readability scores of accounting narratives derived from earnings management practices in 226 companies in the UK, Spain, and Jordan from 2017 to 2021.Our analytical method applies three of the most significant readability measures based on the characteristics of each language, as well as multiple linear and logistic regression models, to demonstrate the impact of language differences on the readability of accounting narratives. The findings indicate that earnings management practices significantly affect the readability of accounting disclosures/narratives, and that past financial profitability moderates this relationship. The implications of the findings reported will help decision-makers better understand the quality and readability of accounting narratives derived from companies' earnings management. Our analysis also has implications for how stakeholders, accounting policymakers, financial statement auditors, and academics understand the relationship between accounting reporting narratives and earnings management. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

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]

The present study examined the potential bias of foreign language effect (FLE) on moral judgment by considering the confounding influence of perverse responses. A perverse response is a reaction that contradicts both norms and consequences, that is, participants choose to take action (or inaction) when both norms and consequences require inaction (or action). We predicted that using a foreign language, compared to a native language, would elicit more perverse responses, thereby confounding the participants’ moral judgments. To test our prediction, we distinguished between active and inhibitory perverse responses and re-analyzed the raw data from a previous FLE study using four approaches: the traditional dilemma paradigm, the process dissociation model, the consequence-norm-generalised inaction/action (CNI) model, and the consequence-overall action/inaction-norm (CAN) algorithm. The results of the mediation analyses consistently showed that active and inhibitory perverse responses mediate the effects of foreign/native language on moral decisions in all the four approaches. The results suggest that individuals using a foreign language tend to exhibit more active and inhibitory perverse responses, which in turn influence their moral decisions. Addressing this issue could help clarify the FLE on moral decision-making. [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]

The primary purpose of this study was to examine the association of foreign language use and religiosity to moral decision-making in the context of a realistic set of scenarios about the COVID-19 pandemic. We used the CNI model in which four variants of a single dilemma manipulated norms and consequences, which are the defining characteristics of deontology and utilitarianism, respectively. A secondary purpose of the study was to investigate the role of in-group versus out-group membership in shaping moral judgment. 461 participants responded to COVID-19 scenarios either in their native language (Persian) or foreign language (English). Contrary to findings of prior research on moral judgment, the results of the current study indicated that those using their native language showed more sensitivity to consequences compared to those using a foreign language and that less religious individuals were more likely to endorse norms compared to more religious participants. These unexpected findings may be attributed either to the use of more realistic scenarios or to some problems associated with the use of the CNI model. Further, participants' responses did not significantly differ as a result of group membership, but in line with prior research, exploratory analyses revealed that men showed greater sensitivity to consequences. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The language used to present an argument has long been argued to influence people's reaction to that argument. This study examined how language and grammatical structure influenced response to health-related dilemmas. We investigated whether medical students' willingness to receive a medical treatment or to take an action (regarding advancing one's own health or other people's health) was influenced by the language (first versus foreign) and the grammatical structures (modifiers and quantifiers) used. Saudi medical students (N = 368) read health-related dilemmas using different adverbial modifiers and quantifiers in Arabic or in English. The participants were randomly assigned to one of four conditions: Arabic with high certainty (i.e., very-modifier and all-quantifier), Arabic with low certainty (no very-modifier and some-quantifier), English with high certainty, and English with low certainty. The results showed that the participants were susceptible to a foreign language effect, but not to a grammatical structure effect. We discuss the implications of these results in relation to how different health-scenarios may affect decision making for health professionals. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Previous research has shown that bilinguals respond differently to moral dilemmas posed in each of their languages, tending to make deontologically-based decisions (based on right or wrong) in their first language and utilitarian decisions (bringing about the most good) in their second language. In the present study, we tested several predictors of bilinguals' moral reasoning: language (L1 Russian or L2 English), gender, proficiency, age, and dilemma. We included two different personal moral dilemmas: one involving saving the lives of others (by killing a fat man) and one involving saving one's own life (by killing a baby). Russian-English bilinguals responded to one of these dilemmas in Russian and the other in English. The results showed only two significant predictors of responses: dilemma and age. The bilinguals made more deontological decisions for the dilemma about saving others and more utilitarian decisions for the dilemma involving saving their own lives. The participants who gave deontological responses were slightly older than those who gave utilitarian responses. We argue that factors other than language may be more important in bilinguals' moral reasoning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

According to the "reduced emotionality hypothesis", we are less emotionally driven when reasoning in a foreign language (FL) than in a native language (NL). We examined whether this foreign language effect (FLe) extends to the way we perceive motivational quotes (i.e., encouraging slogans conveying a profound and inspirational message): we expected FL participants to rate motivational quotes as less profound than NL participants. Strikingly, we observed the opposite: FL participants found motivational quotes more profound than NL participants, even after controlling for potential confounders (e.g., IQ, reasoning style). Both FL and NL participants gave similarly low profundity ratings to pseudo-profound bullshit sentences (i.e., meaningless sentences sounding profound), indicating that the message must be meaningful for the FLe to arise. We propose that, like space or time, language could promote psychological distance. This favours a focus on the background of a message to indicate profoundness. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The moral foreign-language effect (M-FLE) translates into more utilitarian choices, even when given the option of self-sacrifice. We explore the M-FLE in 85 children, who were presented with seven moral dilemmas varying in utilitarianism, aversiveness, and whether they allowed the option of self-sacrifice; 42 answered to the dilemmas in their native language (Spanish), and 43 in a foreign language (English). Participants were more utilitarian and willing to sacrifice themselves when using their foreign language. Educational and developmental implications are discussed, especially in the context of bilingual education. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The Moral Foreign Language Effect is a phenomenon in which individuals exhibit lower moral engagement (i.e., are simultaneously less deontological and less utilitarian) when using a foreign language compared to their native language. This paper reports on three experiments involving bilingual participants to investigate the impact of foreign language on moral judgment in self-sacrifice dilemmas.In three experiments, we asked N = 425 participants whether they would self-sacrifice to save other people. In Experiment 1, the people to be saved were strangers. In Experiment 2, they were relatives. Experiment 3 replicated the first two with the addition of the control condition with the option to sacrifice a stranger instead.Experiments 1 and 3 showed no effect of language on willingness to self-sacrifice. In Experiment 2, the participants using a foreign language were less willing to sacrifice themselves.Language has no consistent effect on participants’ willingness to sacrifice themselves or others.Contrary to previous studies on the issue, we controlled both for the beneficiaries (strangers vs. relatives) and the method of saving them (self-sacrifice vs. sacrifice of a stranger).Our results cast doubt on the robustness of the moral Foreign Language Effect.We limited our research design to two language pairs. Failure to replicate Experiment 2 results in Experiment 3 could be an effect of the different language pairs used in both experiments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This study examines the interaction effect of foreign language and obedience pressure from superiors on the ethical judgment in an auditing context. We conducted a 2 × 2 between-participants experiment with language and obedience pressure as independent variables. Participants are accounting students from eight leading universities in Japan to proxy entry-level auditing professionals. They were asked to provide their judgments based on a consolidation reporting scenario. We found that, under obedience pressure, foreign language use makes one's judgment less aligned with the superior's preference (less compliant) than the use of the native language. These results provide new insights regarding the potential boundary of the foreign language effect in auditing issues. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The moral foreign language effect (MFLE) describes how people's decisions may change when a moral dilemma is presented in either their native (NL) or foreign language (FL). Growing attention is being directed to unpacking what aspects of bilingualism may influence the MFLE, though with mixed or inconclusive results. The current study aims to bridge this gap by adopting a conceptualization of bilingualism that frames this construct as a composite and continuous measure. In a between-group analysis, we asked 196 Italian–English bilinguals to perform a moral dilemmas task in either their NL (i.e., Italian) or FL (i.e., English). In a within-group analysis, we evaluated the effects of FL age of acquisition, FL proficiency, and language dominance – all measured as continuous variables – on moral decision-making. Overall, findings indicate that differences within bilinguals' language experience impact moral decisions in an FL. However, the effect of the linguistic factors considered was not ubiquitous across dilemmas, and not always emerged into a MFLE. In light of these results, our study addresses the importance of treating bilingualism as multidimensional, rather than a unitary variable. It also discusses the need to reconceptualize the FLE and its implications on moral decision-making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study investigated the foreign language effect within an altruistic decision making process. Chinese–English bilinguals made altruistic decisions in their native (L1: Chinese) and second language (L2: English). The decisions were framed in two ways: either as "not to harm" (harm frame) or as "to help" the other person (help frame) at one's economic cost. Behavioral results suggest that bilinguals might behave more altruistically in the harm frame than the help frame (i.e., framing effect) in their native language but not in their foreign language. Electrophysiological results show that the modulation of the framing effect in the native versus foreign language originated in the early ERP components (N1 and N2) and did not present in the late positive potential (LPP). These findings suggest the foreign language effect most likely results from the reduced emotional reaction in a foreign compared to the native language. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The CNI model generates C, N, and I parameters to measure people's mental processes—consequence sensitivity (C), norm sensitivity (N), and generalized inaction/action preferences (I)—in moral decision making. Given the limitations of the CNI model, the CAN algorithm was developed to depict the consequence sensitivity (C), overall action versus inaction preferences (A), norm sensitivity (N), and perverse responses with the other three parameters. However, no studies have clarified whether and how the CAN algorithm can solve the limitations of the CNI model. The present study systematically uncovers the limitations of the CNI model and the solutions provided by the CAN algorithm: (a) the CNI model does not consider negative values of the parameters, but the CAN algorithm does; (b) the sequential processing assumption of the CNI model is biased, the CAN algorithm proposes a parallel calculation strategy to fix this problem; (c) the calculation of the I parameter of the CNI model is inaccurate, so the CAN algorithm proposes the A parameter to replace it; (d) the CNI model has a problem measuring perverse responses, while the CAN algorithm develops three parameters to measure these. We examined some of our points on the basis of a reanalysis of the foreign language effect (FLE) by comparing the parameters from the CAN algorithm with those from the CNI model. We found that consequence and norm sensitivity were estimated to be greater using the CNI model than with the CAN algorithm. Consequently, these overestimations significantly (consequence sensitivity) and marginally (norm sensitivity) interfered with the FLE, making the FLE more likely to return a false positive result. In addition, the CAN algorithm was able to measure the extent of perverse responses, indicating that foreign language (compared to a native language) leads to more perverse responses. The present study demonstrates that the CNI model magnifies the Type I error of conclusions and that the CAN algorithm (compared to the CNI model) provides more insights regarding moral decision making. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

After decades of political, economic, and scientific efforts, humanity has not gotten any closer to global sustainability. With less than a decade to reach the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) deadline of the 2030 Agenda, we show that global development agendas may be getting lost in translation, from their initial formulation to their final implementation. Sustainability science does not "speak" most of the 2000 languages from Africa, where the lack of indigenous terminology hinders global efforts such as the COVID-19 pandemic fight. Sociolinguistics, social psychology, cognitive ergonomics, geography, environmental sciences, and artificial intelligence (AI) are all relevant disciplinary fields to uncover the "foreign language effect" that hinders the implementation of the SDGs in Africa. We make the case for detecting and addressing language barriers towards multilingual sustainability in Africa by (1) exploring the "foreign language effect" among African decision-makers and recognising their alternative social representations about sustainability; and (2) detecting Western language stereotypes about sustainability. We propose rethinking SDG-related scientific notions through participatory natural language processing (NLP) and the study of African social representations of sustainability, thus enabling a more inclusive and efficient approach to "sustainability(ies)". [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Health care delivery depends on effective provider–patient communication. An important issue is whether and how this communication differs for second language (SL) patients. While understanding health information can be impaired by limited English proficiency, we examined a potential benefit of SL use. SL users may be "affectively distanced", with weaker emotional reactions to content presented in a foreign versus native language (NL). This distancing may have important implications for understanding, and for making decisions and judgements about health information to the extent these processes involve affective responses. For example, patients may respond to diagnostic test results indicating risk of illness with less intense negative affect if the information is presented in their SL. Language differences in affective response may in turn attenuate risk perception for SL versus NL users, with perceived risk being lower while the objective risk associated with test results increases, as predicted by the 'risk as feelings' view of risk perception, where perceived risk is based on affective response to the information. On the other hand, risk perception may be more calibrated with objective risk for SL users to the extent that affective distancing encourages SL users to rely on deliberative rather than affective-based, intuitive processes related to risk perception. SL use may also influence attitudes toward and intentions to perform behaviors that address risk because these processes are driven in part by risk perception and memory for the risk information. These processes may also depend on numeracy, defined as the ability to make sense of and rationalize numbers, because it influences risk perception. We tested these predictions in the context of a simulated Electronic Health Record (EHR) patient portal, in which participants were presented diagnostic test results in English from fictional patients. Native English speakers (n = 25), and native Mandarin speakers with higher numeracy (n = 25) and lower numeracy (n = 28) participated in the study. Consistent with the 'affective distancing' effect, SL participants with either higher or lower numeracy demonstrated a flatter slope for positive and negative affective responses to the test results compared to NL participants. Moreover, SL participants reported greater perceived risk than NL participants did as objective risk rose. A similar pattern occurred for attitudes toward and intentions to perform behaviors that addressed this risk, especially for treatment health behaviors. On the other hand, language did not influence memory for risk-related information. Our findings extend the affective distancing effect associated with SL use to the health domain and show that this effect influences risk perception and behavioral intentions beyond memory recall and numeracy skills. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The present study expands the literature on the Foreign Language Effect by investigating differences in moral judgment for 280 English-Spanish late bilinguals when processing the button and bridge moral scenarios of the canonical trolley dilemma (Thomson, 1985) in an online questionnaire in either a native (NL), foreign (FL), or code-switched (CS) language environment. The study furthermore examines the effects of emotion on moral standards across these three language contexts, analysing self-reports of individuals' emotions following their moral decisions. Overall, moral judgments in the CS and NL conditions patterned similarly for both dilemmas, while, in line with previous studies, the FL condition elicited an increased percentage of utilitarian decisions in the high-conflict bridge scenario. Unique emotions did not vary significantly across language contexts in either scenario, and no reduction in emotion was seen in participants' FL. However, an interaction between language condition and emotion in the high-conflict dilemma suggests that the ratio and relative ranking of various emotions, and not just the degree of emotionality, may have an influence on moral evaluations. The present study elucidates the previously neglected variable of moral decision processing in the context of code-switching and discusses cognitive and emotional explanations for the Foreign Language Effect. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Recent research has suggested that using a foreign languageto present hypothetical moral dilemmas increases the rate ofutilitarian judgments about those dilemmas (e.g., Greene et al,2001) and decreases incoherency between judgments inframing effect tasks (e.g., Tversky & Kahneman, 1981; seeCosta, Foucart, Arnon, Aparici, & Apesteguia, 2014; Costa,Foucart, Hayakawa, Aparici, Apesteguia, Heafner, & Keysar,2014; Keysar, Hayakawa, & An, 2012). However, existingresearch has mainly investigated this effect using between-participants designs (i.e., different participants in the foreignand native language conditions). Such designs are unable toexclude non-equivalent conditions as a confounding variable.In contrast, this study examined the foreign language effectusing a within-subjects design (i.e., all participants respondedto moral dilemmas (Greene et al, 2001) and framing effecttasks (Tversky & Kahneman, 1981) in both their native andforeign languages. The “foreign language effect” wasreplicated, excluding semantic non-equivalence betweenlanguage conditions as a potential confound. This resultsupports the hypothesis that the foreign language effect isindependent of meaning.

Foreign languages blunt emotional reactions to moral dilemmas. In this study, we aimed at clarifying whether this reduced emotional response applies to the emotions related to the self, empathy, or both. Participants were presented with moral dilemmas, written in their native or foreign language, in which they could sacrifice one man or themselves in order to save five lives (or do nothing and therefore leave five people to die). They were more willing to sacrifice themselves when processing the dilemmas in their foreign language. Also, empathy scores were reduced when responding in the foreign language, but were no reliable predictors of participants' responses to the dilemmas. These results suggest that processing a foreign language reduces emotional reactivity due to psychological and emotional self-distance. [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]

The mechanism behind the influence of a foreign language on the framing effect is still controversial, in terms of whether this influence is due to emotional resonance evoked by language or to the cognitive differences stemming from the language-switching process. We resolved this ambiguity by conducting two experiments with Chinese students. In Study 1 we verified the influence of language (English, Chinese, pinyin) on the framing effect in the decision-making process. In Study 2 we controlled for cognitive processing activities using language translation instructions (switching conditions) to examine the framing effect change in the decision-making process caused by differences in language statements. Our results show that emotional resonance was a crucial factor behind this phenomenon, and that cognitive factors were relevant when emotional resonance variables were controlled for. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Aims and objectives: How health risks are communicated can have a substantial impact on medical judgments and choice. Here, we examine whether the language used to process health-related information systematically changes bilinguals' perceptions and preferences. Methodology: Chinese-English bilinguals were presented with 10 medical scenarios in either their native language (Mandarin Chinese; n = 76) or a second language (American English; n = 84) and made judgments regarding their familiarity with the medical conditions and the perceived severity of the possible symptoms (incurability, emotional distress, physical pain, social harm). Participants then rated their agreement with statements pertaining to beliefs about medical decision-making (trust in the good intentions of doctors, acceptability of challenging doctors, importance of involving family, preference for standard treatments, preference for experimental treatments). Data and analysis: Linear mixed-effects models were constructed for judgments of medical conditions and for beliefs regarding medical decision-making. Findings and conclusions: Medical conditions were perceived to be easier to cure, less physically painful, and less emotionally distressing when processed in the second language, English. Using English also increased endorsement of beliefs (such as challenging doctors' opinions and accepting experimental treatments) that were more consistent with individualistic than with collectivistic norms. We propose that the activation of emotions and values is linked to language, with consequences for how individuals make decisions that impact their health and well-being. Originality: The present study is among the first to systematically examine the interactive psychological impact of language context and experience on judgments and beliefs in an applied medical domain. Significance: With millions of practitioners and patients worldwide making medical decisions in a combination of native and non-native languages, the present findings highlight the need to account for language, including language use, context, and experience, in order to optimize health-related communication and judgments. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]