That is the title of the paper at least, here is the abstract:
It is widely assumed that thinking is independent of language modality because an argument is either logically valid or invalid regardless of whether we read or hear it. This is taken for granted in areas such as psychology, medicine, and the law. Contrary to this assumption, we demonstrate that thinking from spoken information leads to more intuitive performance compared with thinking from written information. Consequently, we propose that people think more intuitively in the spoken modality and more analytically in the written modality. This effect was robust in five experiments (N = 1,243), across a wide range of thinking tasks, from simple trivia questions to complex syllogisms, and it generalized across two different languages, English and Chinese. We show that this effect is consistent with neuroscientific findings and propose that modality dependence could result from how language modalities emerge in development and are used over time. This finding sheds new light on the way language influences thought and has important implications for research that relies on linguistic materials and for domains where thinking and reasoning are central such as law, medicine, and business.
That is by Geipel, J., & Keysar, B. Or do I need to shout?
And what does this mean for Socrates?
For the pointer I thank the excellent Kevin Lewis.
The post Listening speaks to our intuition while reading promotes analytic thought appeared first on Marginal REVOLUTION.
- The ancient Greek world is really far out of sample for this … by Hook
- In reply to dbelk. *the above was supposed to say “Y not … by dbelk x 2
- If the argument is that reading a word requires a higher level … by So Much For Subtlety
- I don’t buy this at all. by Dave Smith
- This may actually explain something I experience every once in … by dbelk
- Plus 10 more…