Is Language an Economic Institution? Evidence from R&amp;amp;D Investment

Daniel, Jianxin; Su, Xunhua; Tang, Yun; Xu, Bin

doi:10.2139/ssrn.3262822

Cited by 5 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 8 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…This includes health decisions (Ireland, Schwartz, Chen, Ungar, & Albarracín, 2015;Vuchinich & Simpson, 1998), drug use (McKerchar & Renda, 2012), pathological gambling (Hodgins & Engel, 2002), and investment in savings (Liu & Aaker, 2007). FTR status has been found to predict a similarly diverse range of behaviour including health outcomes such as obesity, peak blood flow, grip strength, and physical exercise levels (Chen, 2013); educational outcomes such as math and reading scores, graduation, absenteeism, retention, and disciplinary incidents (Figlio et al, 2016); firm-level investment in research and development (Chi et al, 2018); country-level economic growth as indicated by output per worker, patents, innovation performance, and capital stock (Hübner & Vannoorenberghe, 2015b); country-level likelihood of having taken climate change mitigation action ; and even country-level suicide rates and support for euthanasia (Lien & Zhang, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other work has applied Chen's (2013) approach to a variety of outcomes (Bernhofer, Costantini, & Kovacic, 2019;S. Chen, Cronqvist, Ni, & Zhang, 2017;Chi, Su, Tang, & Xu, 2018;Figlio, Giuliano, Özek, & Sapienza, 2016;Falk et al, 2018;Guin, 2017;Hübner & Vannoorenberghe, 2015b, 2015a; J. Kim, Kim, & Zhou, 2017; S. Kim &…”

Section: Support For (And Issues With) the Temporal Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Other naturalistic outcomes are likewise not granular enough to rule out unmeasured risk (S. Chen et al, 2017;Chi et al, 2018;Falk et al, 2018;Fasan, Gotti, Kang, & Liu, 2016;Figlio et al, 2016;Guin, 2017;Hübner & Vannoorenberghe, 2015b, 2015aJ. Kim et al, 2017;S.…”

Section: Modals Not Tenses Cause Discounting 12mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Low-certainty modals not future tenses cause increased psychological discounting

Robertson¹,

Roberts²,

Majid³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Speaking a language that obliges the future tense for linguistic Future Time Reference (FTR) has been hypothesised to cause speakers to perceive delayed outcomes as temporally distal and therefore less valuable (“temporal discounting”). Conversely, we hypothesise that the obligation to use low-certainty modal verbs, e.g. may, causes speakers to construe risky and delayed outcomes as riskier and therefore less valuable (“combined discounting”). We experimentally elicited free-text FTR responses and measured construals of future temporal distance and discounting of (risky) delayed rewards in speakers of Dutch (which does not oblige FTR marking) and English (which does). We used statistical mediation models, which parse out an indirect effect of a predictor on an outcome via a mediating variable, a direct effect of a predictor on an outcome, and a total effect—the other two combined. English speakers construed future events as temporally proximal, which in turn caused less (rather than more) temporal discounting (indirect effect). The direct effect went in the opposite direction, meaning there was no population-level difference in temporal discounting (no total effect, Study 1). When we measured combined discounting, English speakers discounted more (a total effect, Study 2). Further, English speakers used more low-certainty language and this caused increased combined discounting (an indirect effect). Future tense use did not impact construals of temporal distance, meaning future tense use did not mediate an effect on combined discounting (Study 2). We addressed possible cultural confounds by testing Dutch-English bilinguals (Study 3). When bilinguals were tested in English, they used more low-certainty modal verbs, which in turn caused increased combined discounting (an indirect effect). This was moderated by self-reported English proficiency, indicating language, not culture, is responsible for effects. Results suggest effects of FTR grammar are not driven by obligatory future tenses affecting temporal discounting, but by obligatory low-certainty modals affecting combined discounting.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: Support For (And Issues With) the Temporal Hypothesismentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Low-certainty modals not future tenses cause increased psychological discounting

Robertson¹,

Roberts²,

Majid³

et al. 2022

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Kim, Kim, & Zhou, 2017), had better educational outcomes (Figlio et al, 2016), made healthier lifestyle choices (Guin, 2017), had greater support for future-orientated environmental policies (Mavisakalyan, Tarverdi, & Weber, 2018;Pérez & Tavits, 2017), and had better macroeconomic performance (Hübner & Vannoorenberghe, 2015a, 2015b. A number of other studies attest to the conclusion that FTR status is a reliable predictor of intertemporal behavior (S. Chen, Cronqvist, Ni, & Zhang, 2017;Chi, Su, Tang, & Xu, 2018;Galor et al, 2016;Liang et al, 2018;Lien & Zhang, 2020;Sutter, Angerer, Glätzle-rützler, & Lergetporer, 2015;Thoma & Tytus, 2018). Although there are various statistical concerns with the robustness of these associations (Gotti, Roberts, Fasan, & Robertson, 2021;Roberts, Winters, & Chen, 2015), practically all studies make simplified assumptions about FTR typology.…”

Section: The Linguistic Savings Hypothesis Explainedmentioning

confidence: 99%

Not When But Whether: Modality and Future Time Reference in English and Dutch

Robertson¹,

Roberts

2023

Cognitive Science

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research on linguistic relativity and economic decisions hypothesized that speakers of languages with obligatory tense marking of future time reference (FTR) should value future rewards less than speakers of languages which permit present tense FTR. This was hypothesized on the basis of obligatory linguistic marking (e.g., will) causing speakers to construe future events as more temporally distal and thereby to exhibit increased “temporal discounting”: the subjective devaluation of outcomes as the delay until they will occur increases. However, several aspects of this hypothesis are incomplete. First, it overlooks the role of “modal” FTR structures which encode notions about the likelihood of future outcomes (e.g., might). This may influence “probability discounting”: the subjective devaluation of outcomes as the probability of their occurrence decreases. Second, the extent to which linguistic structures are subjectively related to temporal or probability discounting differences is currently unknown. To address these, we elicited FTR language and subjective ratings of temporal distance and probability from speakers of English, which exhibits strongly grammaticized FTR, and Dutch, which does not. Several findings went against the predictions of the previous hypothesis: Framing an FTR statement in the present (“Ellie arrives later on”) versus the future tense (“…will arrive…”) did not affect ratings of temporal distance; English speakers rated future statements as relatively more temporally proximal than Dutch speakers; and English and Dutch speakers rated future tenses as encoding high certainty, which suggests that obligatory future tense marking might result in less discounting. Additionally, compared with Dutch speakers, English speakers used more low‐certainty terms in general (e.g., may) and as a function of various experimental factors. We conclude that the prior cross‐linguistic observations of the link between FTR and psychological discounting may be caused by the connection between low‐certainty modal structures and probability discounting, rather than future tense and temporality.

show abstract

“…Since then, numerous other studies have found that speakers of languages like Dutch tend to behave as though they discount less (e.g. Chi, Su, Tang, & Xu, 2018;Falk et al, 2018;Figlio, Giuliano, Özek, & Sapienza, 2016;Liang, Marquis, Renneboog, & Sun, 2018;Mavisakalyan, Tarverdi, & Weber, 2018;Pérez & Tavits, 2017;Zhu, Hu, Wang, & Zheng, 2020).…”

Section: P R E -P U B L I C a T I O N D R A F Tmentioning

confidence: 99%

Language about the future on social media as a novel marker of anxiety and depression: A big-data and experimental analysis

Robertson¹,

Carney²,

Trudel³

2021

Preprint

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Anxiety and depression are mood disorders which negatively impact many people. Psychology studies suggest depression is associated with future time horizons, or how "far" into the future people tend to think, and anxiety is associated with temporal discounting, or how much people devalue delayed future rewards. Separate studies from linguistics and economics have shown that individual differences in how people refer to future time predict temporal discounting. Yet no one—that we know of—has investigated whether future time reference habits are a marker of anxiety and/or depression. In Study 1, we analysed data from the social media website Reddit to test for relationships between these variables. Users who had previously posted popular contributions to forums dedicated to anxiety and depression referenced the future and the past more often than controls, had more proximal future and past time horizons, and significantly differed in their linguistic future time reference patterns. They used fewer future tense constructions (e.g. will), fewer high-certainty constructions (e.g. certainly), more low-certainty constructions (e.g. could), more bouletic modal constructions (e.g. hope), and more deontic modal constructions (e.g. must). This motivated Study 2, a survey-based mediation analysis. Self-reported anxious participants represented future events as more temporally distal and therefore temporally discounted to a greater degree. The same was not true of depression. We contextualise the results using two theoretical frameworks: construal level theory and functionalist approaches to clinical psychology. We conclude that methods which combine big-data with experimental paradigms can help identify novel markers of mental illness, which can aid in the development of new therapies and diagnostic criteria.

show abstract

Is Language an Economic Institution? Evidence from R&D Investment

Cited by 5 publications

References 8 publications

Low-certainty modals not future tenses cause increased psychological discounting

Low-certainty modals not future tenses cause increased psychological discounting

Not When But Whether: Modality and Future Time Reference in English and Dutch

Language about the future on social media as a novel marker of anxiety and depression: A big-data and experimental analysis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About