4 ms·

Study authors: "We found an association" Typical bad reporting: "Study finds causation" It should be obvious on the face of it that in aggregate, multi-lingua

by cjensen 10y ago

Study authors: "We found an association" Typical bad reporting: "Study finds causation" It should be obvious on the face of it that in aggregate, multi-lingual people live lives that are significantly different than mono-lingual people. I'd bet a lot of money that breast cancer rates, for example, are much higher in multi-lingual people. If I'm right, it's not because multi-lingualism causes breast cancer. It's because both breast cancer and multi-lingualism are associated with higher-wealth individuals.

rue 10y ago
FWIW multilingualism isn’t just for the privileged, by a long shot (though I don’t know what the sample for the study was). Lots of people in third world countries are bi- or multilingual.
- cjensen 10y ago
  "in aggregate"
- pbreit 10y ago
  In the US, at least, bilingualism is likely more prevalent amongst the less well off (ie immigrants).
deleted 10y ago
[deleted]
GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago
> It's because both breast cancer and multi-lingualism are associated with higher-wealth individuals. Could you unpack some of your reckons here.
- cjensen 10y ago
  Okay, let's unpack some of the steps in that... Breast Cancer is more common among women who defer having children to later in life, or who never have children. In the US, intentionally deferring children is a behavior seen most commonly among professional women. Professional women have greater household income than others. So that's the first unpack: "breast cancer is associated with wealth". This is why the two largest hot-spots of breast cancer in the US are Marin County in California and Long Island in New York. Again sticking to the US, multi-lingualism is generally seen in two groups. The first is obvious: immigrants. Immigrants are a mix of lower-income labor from nearby countries[1], and higher-income professionals from across the globe looking to get better-paying jobs or opportunity. So without any evidence to back me up, I'm going to just assert that immigrants are in the middle of the income scale. The second group of multi-linguals in the US are the rich. Either the college-educated who took language in school or those who travel enough to use another language. Again, in aggregate, the college-educated are on the higher end of the income spectrum. Those who travel, in aggregate, tend to be wealthier with disposable income that they can spend on experiences like travel. So yeah, there's plenty to argue with in the second part of my thesis ("multi-lingualism is associated with higher-wealth"), but I think it's a pretty good bet. [1] It's hard to a low-income laborer to get enough money to travel to a country far away

by cjensen 10y ago

rue 10y ago

FWIW multilingualism isn’t just for the privileged, by a long shot (though I don’t know what the sample for the study was). Lots of people in third world countries are bi- or multilingual.

cjensen 10y ago
"in aggregate"
pbreit 10y ago
In the US, at least, bilingualism is likely more prevalent amongst the less well off (ie immigrants).

deleted 10y ago

[deleted]

GFK_of_xmaspast 10y ago

> It's because both breast cancer and multi-lingualism are associated with higher-wealth individuals. Could you unpack some of your reckons here.

cjensen 10y ago
Okay, let's unpack some of the steps in that... Breast Cancer is more common among women who defer having children to later in life, or who never have children. In the US, intentionally deferring children is a behavior seen most commonly among professional women. Professional women have greater household income than others. So that's the first unpack: "breast cancer is associated with wealth". This is why the two largest hot-spots of breast cancer in the US are Marin County in California and Long Island in New York. Again sticking to the US, multi-lingualism is generally seen in two groups. The first is obvious: immigrants. Immigrants are a mix of lower-income labor from nearby countries[1], and higher-income professionals from across the globe looking to get better-paying jobs or opportunity. So without any evidence to back me up, I'm going to just assert that immigrants are in the middle of the income scale. The second group of multi-linguals in the US are the rich. Either the college-educated who took language in school or those who travel enough to use another language. Again, in aggregate, the college-educated are on the higher end of the income spectrum. Those who travel, in aggregate, tend to be wealthier with disposable income that they can spend on experiences like travel. So yeah, there's plenty to argue with in the second part of my thesis ("multi-lingualism is associated with higher-wealth"), but I think it's a pretty good bet. [1] It's hard to a low-income laborer to get enough money to travel to a country far away