“Piensa” twice: On the foreign language effect in decision making

In this article, we assess to what extent decision making is affected by the language in which a given problem is presented (native vs. foreign). In particular, we aim to ask whether the impact of various heuristic biases in decision making is diminished when the problems are presented in a foreign language. To this end, we report four main studies in which more than 700 participants were tested on different types of individual decision making problems. In the first study, we replicated Keysar et al.’s (2012) recent observation regarding the foreign language effect on framing effects related to loss aversion. In the second section, we assessed whether the foreign language effect is present in other types of framing problems that involve psychological accounting biases rather than gain/loss dichotomies. In the third section, we studied the foreign language effect in several key aspects of the theory of decision making under risk and uncertainty. In the fourth study, we assessed the presence of a foreign language effect in the cognitive reflection test, a test that includes logical problems that do not carry emotional connotations. The absence of such an effect in this test suggests that foreign language leads to a reduction of heuristic biases in decision making across a range of decision making situations and provide also some evidence about the boundaries of the phenomenon. We explore several potential factors that may underlie the foreign language effect in decision making.     

The effect of identical word pairs on people's metamemory judgments: What are the contributions of processing fluency and beliefs about memory?

Judgments of learning (JOLs) are higher for identical pairs (dog–dog) than for related pairs (dog–cat). This identical effect may be mediated (a) by processing fluency (i.e., identical pairs are processed faster than related pairs) or (b) by a belief that identical pairs are better remembered or (c) by both factors. In the present work, we assessed the contribution of both factors. We evaluated whether a measure of processing fluency (i.e., self-paced study) mediated the relationship between pair type and JOLs (Experiment 1) and attempted to disrupt processing fluency using an AlTeRnAtInG presentation format (Experiment 2). We also evaluated whether judgments made in the absence of processing fluency demonstrated the identical effect (Experiment 3), and, finally, we had participants read a vignette about an experiment that included both pair types and estimate which pairs would be best remembered (Experiment 4). Evidence from all experiments converged on the conclusion that people's beliefs about how variables affect memory—and not differential fluency—best explain the identical effect, although we cannot entirely rule out the possibility that fluency plays a small role. The outcomes were consistent with the analytic-processing theory of JOLs—namely, when instructed to make JOLs, people adopt an analytic problem-solving approach that involves identifying variation across pairs that plausibly relate to memory and then use this variation to make JOLs.     

Are go/no-go tasks preferable to two-choice tasks in response time experiments with older adults?

Recent research has shown that, in response time (RT) tasks, the go/no-go response procedure produces faster (and less noisy) RTs and fewer errors than the two-choice response procedure in children, although these differences are substantially smaller in college-aged adults. Here we examined whether the go/no-go procedure can be preferred to the two-choice procedure in RT experiments with older adults (i.e. another population with slower and more error-prone responding than college-aged individuals). To that end, we compared these response procedures in two experiments with older adults (M_age?=?83 years): a visual word recognition task (lexical decision) and a perceptual task (numerosity discrimination). A group of young adults (M_age?=?31 years) served as a control. In the lexical decision experiment, results showed a go/no-go advantage in the mean RTs and in the error rates for words; however, this was not accompanied by less noisy RT data. The magnitude of the word-frequency effect was similar in the two response procedures. The numerosity discrimination experiment did not reveal any clear differences across response procedures, except that the RTs were noisier in the go/no-go procedure. Therefore, we found no compelling reasons why the go/no-go procedure should be preferred over the two-choice procedure in RT experiments with older adults.     

Languages on the screen: Is film comprehension related to the viewers’ fluency level and to the language in the subtitles?

This research aimed at studying the role of subtitling in film comprehension. It focused on the languages in which the subtitles are written and on the participants' fluency levels in the languages presented in the film. In a preliminary part of the study, the most salient visual and dialogue elements of a short sequence of an English film were extracted by the means of a free recall task after showing two versions of the film (first a silent, then a dubbed-into-French version) to native French speakers. This visual and dialogue information was used in the setting of a questionnaire concerning the understanding of the film presented in the main part of the study, in which other French native speakers with beginner, intermediate, or advanced fluency levels in English were shown one of three versions of the film used in the preliminary part. Respectively, these versions had no subtitles or they included either English or French subtitles. The results indicate a global interaction between all three factors in this study: For the beginners, visual processing dropped from the version without subtitles to that with English subtitles, and even more so if French subtitles were provided, whereas the effect of film version on dialogue comprehension was the reverse. The advanced participants achieved higher comprehension for both types of information with the version without subtitles, and dialogue information processing was always better than visual information processing. The intermediate group similarly processed dialogues in a better way than visual information, but was not affected by film version. These results imply that, depending on the viewers' fluency levels, the language of subtitles can have different effects on movie information processing.