Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36745779›Full record

ArticleProceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America2023

Languages and future-oriented economic behavior-Experimental evidence for causal effects.

Ian Ayres, Tamar Kricheil Katz, Tali Regev

Erratum issuedAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. An erratum has been issued. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Ian AyresYale Law School, New Haven, CT 06511.ORCID 0000-0001-6516-6763
Tamar Kricheil KatzTel Aviv University, Buchmann Faculty of Law, 6997801 Tel Aviv, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-1510-5353
Tali RegevTiomkin School of Economics, Reichman University, 4610101 Herzliya, Israel.ORCID 0000-0002-1196-8565

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Studies have shown that the use of languages which grammatically associate the future and the present tends to correlate with more future-oriented behavior. We take an experimental approach to go beyond correlation. We asked bilingual research participants, people fluent in two languages (12 language pairs) which differ in the way they encode time, to make a set of future-oriented economic decisions. We find that participants addressed in a language in which the present and the future are marked more distinctly tended to value future events less than participants addressed in a language in which the present and the future are similarly marked. In an additional experiment, bilingual research participants (seven language pairs) were asked to choose whether they wish to complete a more enjoyable task first or later (delayed gratification). When addressed in a language in which the present and the future are marked more distinctly, participants tended to prefer immediate gratification more than when addressed in a language in which the present and the future are marked less distinctly. We shed light on the mechanism in a within-person experiment in which bilingual research participants (nine language pairs) were asked to spatially mark the distance between the present and the future. When participants were addressed in a language in which the present and the future are marked more distinctly, they tended to express more precise temporal beliefs compared with when addressed in a language in which the present and the future are marked less distinctly.

Indexed as

MultilingualismForecastingHumansLanguagediscount rateeconomic behaviorfuture time referencelanguages

Identifiers

PMID36745779
PMCPMC9964034

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.