講外語能避免商業決策出昏招

Note to CEOs: When your strategy team is making a big decision, ask them to talk it over in their second language.

致各位首席執行官：當你的戰略團隊進行重大決策時，要求他們用外語來進行討論。

That's the upshot of an article published in the February issue of the journal Cognition.

這是《認知》（Cognition）期刊2月號上一篇文章的結論。

The article, which was titled "'Piensa' twice: On the foreign language effect in decision making, found that when people use their non-native second language, the decisions they make are more logical and less affected by emotional biases. In a sense, they hew closer to John Stuart Mills' idealized homo economicus (economic man).

這篇文章的題目是《三思而行：外語對決策的影響》（'Piensa' twice: On the foreign language effect in decision making）。文章發現，當人們用非母語交談時，他們做出的決定更符合邏輯，他們也會更少地受到情感傾向的影響。從某種意義上講，這時他們更接近約翰?斯圖爾特?米爾所說的理想型經濟人。

"We found that in almost all economic problems that imply some kind of emotionality, in which intuition leads us to make decisions that aren't the best, people using a second language were less affected," said Albert Costa, one of the paper's lead authors and head of the Speech Production and Bilingualism group at Barcelona's Pompeu Fabra University.

這篇文章的主筆之一、巴塞羅那龐培法布拉大學（Pompeu Fabra University）語言產生和雙語研究小組負責人艾伯特?科斯塔說：“我們發現，幾乎所有經濟問題都摻雜了某種情緒。這時，直覺引導我們做出的決定並非上策，而說外語的人受到的影響則較小。”

Costa and his cohort were inspired to look into the economic side of bilingual decision-making by a 2012 Psychological Science article by a group of psychologists led by Boaz Keysar of the University of Chicago.

讓科斯塔和他的同伴們想到從經濟角度探索雙語決策問題的是《心理科學》（Psychological Science）期刊2012年刊登的一篇文章，撰寫這篇文章的是以芝加哥大學（University of Chicago）心理學教授博阿斯?凱薩爾爲首的一批心理學家。

In that study, the authors used a "framing" test called the "Asian disease problem," in which bilingual subjects are asked two questions: First, whether they would develop Medicine A, which has a 100% chance to save 200,000 out of 600,000 people, or Medicine B, which has a 33% chance of saving all 600,000 people and a 66.6% chance of saving no one at all. Second, whether they would develop Medicine A, with which 400,000 of the 600,000 people will definitely die, or Medicine B, with which there is a 33.3% chance that no one will die and a 66.6% chance that all 600,000 will.

這些心理學家在他們的研究中進行了一項名爲《亞洲疾病問題》的“句子結構”測試。他們在這項測試中向懂兩種語言的測試對象提出了兩個問題。第一個問題是，你願意開發藥品A還是藥品B：藥品A在60萬人中救活20萬人的可能性爲100%；藥品B有33%的可能救活所有60萬人，但一個人也救不活的可能性爲66.6%。第二個問題是，你願意開發藥品A還是藥品B：使用藥品A，60萬人中有40萬人一定會死亡；使用藥品B，60萬人全都活下來的可能性爲33%，全部死亡的可能性爲66.6%。

Although the questions are statistically identical, subjects more often chose Medicine A in the first question and Medicine B in the second when they used their native language. That's because the framing of the question activates people's "loss aversion," an emotional bias that leads us to take more risks to avoid losses than to acquire gains.

雖然這兩個問題中的數字完全相同，但用母語進行測試時，測試對象在回答第一個問題時更多地選擇了藥品A，回答第二個問題時則更多地選擇了藥品B，原因是第二個問題的句子結構引起了測試對象的“厭惡損失”情緒。在這種情緒影響下，人們會冒更大的風險來避免損失，而不是爭取收益。

But when the subjects answered these questions in a second language, they did so more logically: They didn't change their answers based on how the question was framed.

而用外語提出這兩個問題時，測試對象的行爲更符合邏輯，他們並沒有因爲句子結構而改變答案。

Costa and his team took this further. First, they repeated the "Asian disease problem" in economic terms (changing "lives" to "euros"). They found that in a second language, the number of people who changed their answer between frames fell from 15% to 6%.

科斯塔和他的團隊在此基礎上更進了一步。首先，他們用經濟概念重複了這項測試（把“人”換成了“歐元”）。他們發現，用第二種語言提問時，受句子結構影響而改變答案的測試對象所佔的比例從15%降到了6%。

Then they ran a Holt-Laury Test, which examines how loss aversion affects our ability to make economic decisions under risk and uncertainty. In the test, subjects are asked to choose between two lotteries at 10 different odds (Lottery A, which offers a 1/10 chance to win $2.00 and 9/10 of $1.60, or Lottery B, which offers 1/10 of winning $3.85 and 9/10 of 10￠; the odds are then tilted to 2/10 and 8/10, 3/10 and 7/10, etc. until they are flipped).

然後他們又進行了一項霍爾特-洛瑞測試，目的是考察人們在面臨風險和不確定局面時，厭惡損失的情緒對他們進行經濟決策的能力會造成什麼樣的影響。在這項測試中，他們請測試對象在10組彩票中進行選擇，每組彩票有2種，中獎機率和金額不同（在第一組中，彩票A贏2美元的可能性是10%，贏1.60美元的可能性是90%；彩票B贏3.85美元的可能性是10%，贏0.1美元的可能性是90%；第二和第三組彩票贏得同樣獎金的機率分別是20%和80%以及30%和70%，依次類推。）

Figuring the expected payoff logically, one should choose Lottery A the first four times and Lottery B the last six. But people generally pick Lottery A several more times than they should because it "feels" safer. At least they do it that way in their native language. When Costa and his colleagues had participants use a second language, the emotional effect of "loss aversion" dropped and the subjects switched to Lottery B sooner.

合理計算預期收益後，人們應該在前四組中選彩票A，在後六組中選彩票B。但測試對象一般都更多地選擇了彩票A，因爲他們“覺得”它更安全。至少，用母語進行測試時的結果是這樣。用外語進行測試時，厭惡損失情緒的影響減少，測試對象更早地開始選擇彩票B。

So what does this mean for business?

那麼，這對企業意味着什麼呢？

"If you make decisions in a second language in business, you can better block the intuitive biases that will lead you to wrong responses," Costa said. "You can distance yourself a bit more and say, 'Hold on.'"

科斯塔指出：“如果用外語來進行經營決策，人們就能更好地防止直覺帶來的錯誤反應。它能讓人們稍稍置身事外，告訴自己‘穩住’。”

When I asked Costa if it would be good to push employees considering a new strategy, for example, to speak to each other in a second language while making decisions, he nodded vigorously.

我問道，對於正在考慮新策略的員工，要求他們在做決定時用外語進行交流是個好辦法嗎？科斯塔用力地點了點頭。

"I would do it. I would. There are obviously other ways of doing it, but this is free," he told me. "When you want to distance yourself and not be emotional, move into a second language."

他回答說：“我會這樣做，會的。顯然還有其他辦法，但這個辦法不需要花錢。如果你想置身事外，避免過於情緒化，那就用外語。”

This effect also extends into entrepreneurial and investment decisions. For entrepreneurs, Costa says, considering their plans in a second language might not stop them from following a dream, but it could help them be more prudent.

這種效果對企業家和投資者的決定具有同樣的影響。科斯塔指出，用外語來考慮自己的計劃或許不能阻止企業家追尋夢想，但可能有助於他們變得比較謹慎。

"You would probably be more cautious in a second language. It's not that you wouldn't take risks, but that you would take them in a more logical manner," he said.

他說：“使用外語時人們很可能變得更加小心。這並不是說他們不會冒險，而是說他們會用更符合邏輯的方式來冒險。”

And at deal time, if you speak two languages, you might chose one over the other depending on whether you're pitching or being pitched.

和別人做生意時，如果你懂兩種語言，你或許可以在它們之間進行選擇，具體用哪一種語言取決於你是賣家還是買家。

"If I wanted to convince someone to invest in something, I would speak to him in his first language. On the other hand, if someone was pitching me, I'd say, 'Fine, but talk in my second language,'" Costa said.

科斯塔說：“如果想說服別人進行投資。我就會用他的母語跟他交流。反過來，如果對方是賣家，我就會說，‘好的，但咱們用外語來談吧。’”

It's worth noting that using a second language doesn't make one better at all decisions. When solving simple, unemotional questions, people perform equally well in their native and second languages. And, Costa noted, it's not that some languages are intrinsically more logical than others -- German more than Spanish, for example. Rather, it's that using a second language helps you block out emotional noise.

要注意，使用外語並不會讓你的所有決定都變得更好。面對簡單而且不影響情緒的問題，人們用母語和外語時的表現相同。科斯塔還提到，沒有哪種語言天生就比別的語言更有邏輯性，比如說，德語的邏輯性並不比西班牙語強。使用外語只是有助於人們屏蔽感情因素帶來的影響。

In the end, this is one more reason for Americans to learn a second language. Only about 20% of the population is considered bilingual, and most of that group had the advantage of growing up speaking a language other than English at home.

最後，這是美國人學外語的又一條理由。懂兩種語言的美國人只有20%，而且其中大多數都有從小在家就不說英語的優勢。

Today, Costa and his colleagues are taking on moral judgments. In a classic test, subjects are asked whether they would divert a barreling train from one track, where it would kill five people, to another, where it would kill one. Then they are asked if they would push a fat man in front of a barreling train, if they knew killing him would save five people. When asked in their native language, 80% of people answer 'yes' to the first question and 'no' to the second.

如今，科斯塔和他的同事們開始研究道德判斷問題。在一個經典的測試中，測試對象面對這樣的問題：有一輛火車飛馳而來，讓它繼續前進會撞死5個人，你是否願意讓它改道，然後撞死1個人。接下來的問題是，如果測試對象知道把一個胖子推到火車前面就能讓這5個人倖免於難，他願不願意去推這個胖子一把。用母語測試時，80%的人在第一個問題上選了“願意”，在第二個問題上選了“不願意”。

But in their second language, 40% of test subjects say they would give the guy a push.

而用外語進行測試時，40%的人表示，他們願意去推那個胖子一把。