Do people think better in a foreign language? In some ways, yes. There is considerable evidence to this effect, at least to the extent that they are less likely to rely on intuitions that can lead to serious errors. This finding reinforces, and makes more plausible, a central claim in regulatory policy, which involves the value of cost–benefit analysis. In a sense, cost–benefit analysis is a foreign language, and it reduces the risk that people will rely on intuitions that cause serious errors.
AdlerM. (2011). Well-being and fair distribution: beyond cost-benefit analysis. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
2.
BronsteenJ.BuccafuscoC.MasurJ. S. (2014). Happiness and the law. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
3.
CostaA.FoucartA.ArnonI.ApariciM.ApesteguiaJ. (2014). “Piensa” twice: on the foreign language effect in decision making. Cognition, 130, 236–254.
4.
GaoS.ZikaO.RogersR. D.ThierryG. (2015). Second language feedback abolishes the “hot hand” effect during even-probability gambling. Journal of Neuroscience, 35, 5983–5989.
5.
GeipelJ.HadjichristidisC.SurianL. (2016). Foreign language affects the contribution of intentions and outcomes to moral judgment. Cognition, 154, 34–39.
6.
HayakawaS.CostaA.FoucartA.KeysarB. (2016). Using a foreign language changes our choices. Trends in Cognitive Sciences, 20, 791–793.
7.
KahanD. M.Jenkins-SmithH.BramanD. (2011). Cultural cognition of scientific consensus. Journal of Risk Research, 14, 147–174.
8.
KahnemanD. (2011). Thinking, fast and slow. New York, NY: Macmillan.
9.
KahnemanD.FrederickS. (2002). Representativeness revisited: Attribute substitution in intuitive judgment. Heuristics and Biases: The Psychology of Intuitive Judgment, 49,1–30.
10.
KelmanM. (2011). The heuristics debate. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.
11.
KeysarB.HayakawaS. L.AnS. G. (2012). The foreign-language effect thinking in a foreign tongue reduces decision biases. Psychological Science, 23, 661–668.
12.
LewisM. (2016). The undoing project. New York, NY: W.W. Norton.
13.
MargolisH. (1996). Dealing with risk: Why the experts and the public disagree on environmental issues. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
14.
SlovicP. (2000). The perception of risk. Risk, society, and policy series. London, England: Earthscan.
15.
SunsteinC. R. (2014). Valuing life: Humanizing the regulatory state. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
16.
ThierryG. (2016). Neurolinguistic relativity: How language flexes human perception and cognition. Language Learning, 66, 690–713. doi:10.1111/lang.12186
17.
WilliamsB. (1981). Moral luck: philosophical papers 1973–1980. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
18.
WinskelH.RatitamkulT.BrambleyV.NagarachindaT.TiencharoenS. (2016). Decision- making and the framing effect in a foreign and native language. Journal of Cognitive Psychology, 28, 427–436.
19.
TverskyA.KahnemanD. (1974). Judgment under uncertainty: Heuristics and biases. Science, 185, 1124–1131.
