People consider choices that involve risk on a daily basis. In principle, willingness to take risks should be independent of the language used while considering the available options. However, research has shown that using a foreign language can increase willingness to take risks, presumably because a foreign language is less emotional. Here, we investigate the robustness of this effect of language on risk by varying participant language background and methodological design features. In addition, we investigate whether using a foreign language increases risk-seeking behaviour in general, or whether it promotes a more strategic approach to risk. Four experiments reveal mixed results regarding the effect that using a foreign language has on risk-taking. Experiment 1 clearly shows that using a foreign language increases strategic risk-taking compared with using a native tongue. In contrast, Experiments 2 and 3 find no effect of the native-ness of language on risk-taking. Experiment 4 supports the idea that using a foreign language promotes risk-taking in general compared with using a native language. We discuss these mixed results in the context of previous findings and suggest potential directions for future research to clarify the effect of language on risk-taking.

No abstract

Though speakers and listeners monitor communication success, they systematically overestimate it. We report an extreme illusion of understanding that exists even without shared language. Native Mandarin Chinese speakers overestimated how well native English-speaking Americans understood what they said in Chinese, even when they were informed that the listeners knew no Chinese. These listeners also believed they understood the intentions of the Chinese speakers much more than they actually did. This extreme illusion impacts theories of speech monitoring and may be consequential in real-life, where miscommunication is costly.