{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.027607361963190184, 'fraction_numerical': 0.005112474437627812, 'mean_word_length': 6.360902255639098, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 0, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Social Influence and Language Learning

Videotaped discussions (among in-group or out-group members) promoting integrative or instrumental benefits of learningEuropean orAsian languages were presented randomly to participants who subsequently rated several Asian and European languages. Responses from 176 English schoolchildren (males and females, 13 years old) on measures of self-reported contact, identification, perceived status and demographic vitality, desire to learn, and integrative and instrumental value of languages were analyzed. As expected, perceptions were consistently more positive about European (especially when promoted by in-group) than Asian languages (especially when promoted by out-group). Promotion of instrumental benefits of European languages accentuated these differences, whereas in-group promotion of Asian languages attenuated existing differences. Self-categorisation and social identification processes are discussed to explain the findings.