|
on Neuroeconomics |
|
Issue of 2021‒12‒20
two papers chosen by |
| By: | Kosyakova, Yuliya (Institute for Employment Research (IAB), Nuremberg, Germany ; Univ. Bamberg); Laible, Marie-Christine (Institute for Employment Research (IAB), Nuremberg, Germany) |
| Abstract: | "We analyze socioemotional skills’ role for destination-language proficiency among recent refugees in Germany. While socioemotional skills have been shown to predict educational outcomes, they have been overlooked for immigrants’ language acquisition. We extend a well-established model of destination-language proficiency and assume that socioemotional skills’ effects manifest through the channels of exposure, efficiency, and incentives. Using longitudinal data and growth curve models, we find that socioemotional skills significantly shape destinationlanguage learning. Openness to new experiences, conscientiousness, risk appetite and locus of control positively relate to language proficiency, while extroversion, agreeableness and neuroticism are insignificant. We observe mediating effects, suggesting that socioemotional skills shape the channels of efficiency or exposure. Moreover, we observe multiplication effects reinforcing other advanta-geous characteristics’ effects on language proficiency. In sum, socioemotional skills affect refugees’ destination-language proficiency and thereby contribute to sustainable economic and societal integration processes. We conclude by discussing policy implications." (Author's abstract, IAB-Doku) ((en)) |
| Keywords: | Bundesrepublik Deutschland ; Auswirkungen ; berufliche Integration ; Deutsch als Fremdsprache ; emotionale Intelligenz ; Geflüchtete ; Persönlichkeitsmerkmale ; Risikobereitschaft ; Selbstverantwortung ; soziale Integration ; soziale Qualifikation ; Spracherwerb ; IAB-BAMF-SOEP-Befragung von Geflüchteten ; 2016-2020 |
| JEL: | D91 J15 J24 I26 |
| Date: | 2021–12–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:iab:iabdpa:202119&r= |
| By: | Bago, Bence; Rand, David; Pennycook, Gordon |
| Abstract: | Why is disbelief in anthropogenic climate change common despite broad scientific consensus to the contrary? A widely-held explanation involves politically motivated (“System 2”) reasoning: Rather than helping uncover truth, people use their reasoning abilities to protect their partisan identities and reject beliefs that threaten those identities. Despite the popularity of this account, the evidence supporting it (i) does not account for the fact that partisanship is confounded with prior beliefs about the world, and (ii) is entirely correlational with respect to the effect of reasoning. Here, we address these shortcomings by (i) measuring prior beliefs and (ii) experimentally manipulating participants’ extent of reasoning using cognitive load and time pressure while they evaluate arguments for or against anthropogenic global warming. The results provide no support for the politically motivated system 2 reasoning account: Engaging in more reasoning led people to have greater coherence between judgments and their prior beliefs about climate change - a process that can be consistent with rational (unbiased) Bayesian reasoning - and did not exacerbate the impact of partisanship once prior beliefs are accounted for. Thus, we challenge the dominant cognitive account of climate disbelief, and suggest that interventions aimed at providing accurate information about climate change may be effective in the long run. |
| Date: | 2021–12–09 |
| URL: | http://d.repec.org/n?u=RePEc:tse:iastwp:126234&r= |