live chat Live chat
insight by wfx

Welcome to Wordwide FX's new enterprise!

Insight by WFX is a synthesis of our passion for languages and the financial markets. Here you will find technical and fundamental analyses from our clients, media partners and contributors in different languages, as well as discussions on languages and translation. And of course we will keep you updated on what is happening inside Wordwide FX Financial Translations. Hope you enjoy it! Greetings from the Wordwide FX team!

quotes
11/09/2018

People are more honest when using a foreign tongue, research finds

author-image

By Wordwide FX Financial Translations

New UChicago-led research suggests that someone who speaks in a foreign language is probably more credible than the average native speaker.

Boaz Keysar, professor of psychology at the University of Chicago, and Yoella Bereby-Meyer, professor in psychology at Ben-Gurion University of the Negev in Israel, co-authored a recent paper in Topics in Cognitive Science that sheds new light on the role language plays in the natural impulse to lie.

In the research, native speakers of English, Spanish, Hebrew and Korean in four countries were invited to play a dice game in which they were paid according to the numbers they reported. Participants who used a foreign language were less likely to cheat than those using their native language, researchers found.

“When individuals have a chance to profit from dishonesty with no risk of being caught, their instinctive tendency is to cheat, while they refrain from cheating when they have time to deliberate,” Bereby-Meyer said. Such opportunities often occur in everyday situations, such as lying about a child’s age to get a cheaper ticket price, or not speaking up when you receive too much change. “There is a natural temptation to lie in these situations,” she added.

Roll of the dice

Working with groups in Spain, the United States, Israel and the Netherlands, researchers randomly assigned participants to perform the game in their native language or in a foreign language. They were paid according to the numbers they reported, and because the outcome was private, participants could cheat to inflate their profit without risk of repercussions.

Even though the game itself only involves reading numbers on a dice, all of the interaction was in the designated language and participants clicked on ‘number words’ on the screen, Bereby-Meyer said. “The die paradigm was a natural way to examine language’s effect on honesty.”

Even though the participants’ responses were private, the higher proportion of 5s or 6s selected by native language users showed that participants had a greater tendency to inflate their numbers when working in their native language.

“Even though there wasn’t much language involved, just being in a foreign language mindset made them more likely to resist temptation,” said Sayuri Hayakawa, a UChicago graduate student who was in charge of the UChicago part of the project.

Check your bias

Keysar and Bereby-Meyer argue that the findings challenge theories of ethical behavior to account for the role of the language in shaping ethical behavior. They believe the outcome is due to the fact that using a foreign language is less intuitive, so the automatic response systems that might give rise to cheating may be disengaged. “There is less temptation, so it becomes easier to refrain from impulsive behavior,” Bereby-Meyer said.

The study also provides a compelling narrative about inherent biases toward foreigners. “Studies have shown people with accents are perceived as less credible because they can be more difficult to understand,” Keysar said. These results suggest the opposite may be true.

Keysar believes this research has important implications, particularly in global business, in which companies work with foreign suppliers and customers on a daily basis. Even though a person’s gut instinct may be to trust these people less, the data show that if they are using a foreign language, they might be more honest.

Bereby-Meyer and Keysar plan to continue their work together in a new study exploring how language affects trust. The most recent study was done in collaboration with Shaul Shalvi from the University of Amsterdam, Albert Costa and Joanna Corey from the Universitat Pompeu Fabra and Sayuri Hayakawa from the University of Chicago.

post-image
quotes
KO postlanguage-image
05/09/2018

무역갈등 우려 재부각에 증시 하락

author-image

By Hussein Sayed, Chief Market Strategist with FXTM. Translated by Wordwide FX Financial Translations

지난주 투자자들은 미국과 멕시코 간의 긍정적 합의 무드가 캐나다, 유럽, 더 나아가 중국까지 이어질 것으로 기대했습니다. 하지만 미국과 캐나다가 합의에 실패함에 따라 이러한 기대감은 좌절되었습니다. 트럼프 대통령은 공정한 협상을 타결할 수 없다면 캐나다를 제외할 것이며, 의회가 간섭을 한다면 NAFTA에서 완전히 탈퇴할 것이라고 위협했습니다. 

또한 트럼프 대통령이 예정 대로 2,000억 달러 규모의 중국산 제품에 대해 관세를 부과한다면 이는 전례 없는 수준의 무역전쟁이 됩니다. 이 관세 부과 조치는 공청회 기간이 끝나는 이번 주 목요일에 시행되게 됩니다. 이에 대해 중국은 600억 달러 규모의 미국 제품에 대해 보복 관세를 부과할 것이라고 예고한 바 있습니다. 이 조치가 예정대로 진행된다면 중국으로 수출되는 미국산 제품의 85%가 관세의 영향을 받게 됩니다. 반면에,중국산 수입품은 총 5,050억 달러 중 절반이 관세의 영향을 받게 됩니다. 

월요일 중국 상하이 종합지수와 CSI300 지수가 1% 이상 하락했습니다. 주가는 저평가 영역에 진입했지만 향후 무역전쟁 전개 방향 둘러싼 불확실성과 경제성장률 영향을 감안할 때 투자자들은 계속해서 중국 주식을 매도할 것으로 보입니다.  이는 장기 가치 투자자에게 훌륭한 매수 기회가 될 것입니다. 위험선호 심리가 약해졌으므로 화요일에 거래가 재개되는 미국 증시는 조정이 예상됩니다. 

월요일 경제지표 발표에서는 중국 8월 제조업 성장률이 14개월래 최저치 를 기록한 것으로 나타났습니다. 8월 Caixin/Markit 제조업 PMI는 5개월 연속으로 위축된 수출 주문의 영향으로 50.6으로 하락했습니다. PMI 지수가 경기 위축 영역에 접근함에 따라 정책결정자가 경기부양을 위해 어떤 조치를 내놓는지 주목할 필요가 있습니다. 

유럽 역시 지난 달 독일과 프랑스 PMI 지수가 소폭 개선된 이후 무역갈등으로 인해 하락했을 수 있는 PMI 최종치가 투자자의 주목을 받을 것 같습니다.  하지만 파운드화가 1.3 밑으로 하락한 만큼, 투자자 대부분은 영국 제조업 PMI에 주목할 것으로 보입니다.
 

post-image
quotes
ID postlanguage-image
04/09/2018

Rupiah anjlok ke level terendah 20 tahun, perdagangan kembali tegang

author-image

By Hussein Sayed, Chief Market Strategist with FXTM. Translated by Wordwide FX Financial Translations

Rupiah merosot ke level terendah terhadap Dolar sejak krisis keuangan Asia 1998 di tengah ketegangan dagang yang memburuk.

Aksi jual brutal Lira Turki dan Peso Argentina juga sangat berperan pada depresiasi drastis Rupiah. USDIDR mencapai 14810 pada saat laporan ini dituliskan. Gejolak di Turki dan Argentina memicu ketidakpastian, sehingga mata uang pasar berkembang dapat semakin melemah. Walaupun Bank Indonesia menyatakan telah mengintervensi pasar valas dan pasar obligasi, tekanan eksternal dalam bentuk ekspektasi kenaikan suku bunga AS dapat terus memperburuk situasi bagi Rupiah. BI mungkin terpaksa menaikkan suku bunga lagi guna berusaha menanggulangi depresiasi Rupiah. Kenaikan suku bunga mungkin dapat membantu Rupiah, namun juga dapat memengaruhi pertumbuhan ekonomi Indonesia.

Saham negatif karena ketegangan dagang

Pekan lalu, investor berharap bahwa perkembangan positif antara AS - Meksiko dapat meluas ke Kanada, Eropa, dan mungkin China. Optimisme ini terpaksa sirna ketika AS gagal mencapai kesepakatan dengan Kanada di hari Jumat. Presiden Donald Trump mengancam bahwa apabila kesepakatan yang adil tidak tercapai, Kanada akan dikeluarkan dan apabila Kongres mengintervensi, ia akan menghentikan NAFTA. 

Trump juga mungkin memperburuk perang dagang apabila ia memutuskan untuk menerapkan tarif terhadap $200 miliar barang China. Ini bisa saja terjadi saat periode komentar publik berakhir pada hari Kamis. Beijing menyatakan akan membalas dengan tarif terhadap $60 miliar barang AS. Jika ini terjadi, hampir 85% barang AS yang dikirim ke China akan terkena tarif. Sementara itu, separuh dari impor China yang totalnya $505 miliar akan terpengaruh. 

Shanghai Composite dan CSI300 merosot lebih dari 1% di hari Senin, dan walaupun valuasi mulai terlihat relatif murah, investor mungkin terus menjual saham China karena ketidakpastian mengenai keberlanjutan perang dagang dan dampaknya pada pertumbuhan ekonomi.  Ini mungkin saat yang tepat untuk investor yang ingin memasuki value investing jangka panjang. Pasar juga mungkin akan melihat penurunan pada saham AS saat trading dimulai di hari Selasa karena selera risiko berkurang. 

Data hari Senin menunjukkan bahwa sektor manufaktur China tumbuh dengan laju paling lambat dalam 14 bulan di bulan Agustus. PMI Manufaktur Caixin/Markit melemah ke 50.6 bulan lalu, karena order ekspor merosot selama lima bulan berturut-turut. Meninjau indeks PMI yang mengalami kontraksi, kita perlu melihat langkah apa yang diambil pembuat kebijakan untuk mendorong pertumbuhan. 

Di Eropa, investor juga akan mencari bukti apakah ketegangan dagang akan menekan data PMI final yang sedikit menguat bulan lalu di Jerman dan Prancis.  PMI manufaktur Inggris akan menjadi sorotan utama investor, karena Pound merosot di bawah 1.3 terhadap Dolar.

 Untuk informasi selengkapnya, kunjungi: FXTM                     
 

post-image
quotes
ZH postlanguage-image
03/09/2018

只要空头仍然控制市场,美元兑瑞郎的目标价可能在更低的价位。

author-image

By Lukman Otunuga @Lukman_FXTM, Research Analyst with FXTM. Translated by Wordwide FX Financial Translations

自2月16日创出最低点0.91867(在研究期间)以来,美元兑瑞郎在日图中一直处于上升趋势,形成更高的顶部和更高的底部,直到7月13日,其录得最高点1.00673(在研究期间)。 目前,瑞郎一直延续自2018年5月9日以来的横盘走势。决定性突破关键支撑位0.97874将打开反转下行空间。 所有三个技术分析指标都支持上述情况。即,MACD(平滑异同平均线)的值正处于零线以下,从而确认美元兑瑞郎向下移动。此外,价格低于线性加权移动平均线,而动力振荡指标的值也低于均衡线100,因此为下跌趋势。只要空头仍然控制市场并且供应超过需求,那么美元兑瑞郎货币对的目标价将可能为更低的价格水平。根据斐波那契价格目标,第一个目标计算为0.96150(161.8%),而第二个目标估算为0.93361(261.8%)。 最后的斐波那契目标价为0.88847。  当然,还有待观察该货币对将下跌多少。

 

 

独特的三河底

在市场延续下跌趋势的同时,交易者对市场方向做空。  长期下跌迫使多头注意到低价,因此随后做多,从而防止市场进一步下跌。

 

第二个波段是第一波段的延续,但更小。 这一次,空头无法创下更低的低点,因为买方获得了较低价格的优势,他们进入市场并预期价格上行。在第三波段,价格走势维持在一个小区间内,在任何一个方向都没有出现极端走势。卖方无力推动市场走低,表明市场疲软,而这意味着抛售压力正在逐渐消退,反转即将来临。

post-image
quotes
03/09/2018

Power Causes Brain Damage

author-image

By Wordwide FX Financial Translations

Via The Atlantic

By Jerry Useem

If power were a prescription drug, it would come with a long list of known side effects. It can intoxicate. It can corrupt. It can even make Henry Kissinger believe that he’s sexually magnetic. But can it cause brain damage?

When various lawmakers lit into John Stumpf at a congressional hearing last fall, each seemed to find a fresh way to flay the now-former CEO of Wells Fargo for failing to stop some 5,000 employees from setting up phony accounts for customers. But it was Stumpf’s performance that stood out. Here was a man who had risen to the top of the world’s most valuable bank, yet he seemed utterly unable to read a room. Although he apologized, he didn’t appear chastened or remorseful. Nor did he seem defiant or smug or even insincere. He looked disoriented, like a jet-lagged space traveler just arrived from Planet Stumpf, where deference to him is a natural law and 5,000 a commendably small number. Even the most direct barbs—“You have got to be kidding me” (Sean Duffy of Wisconsin); “I can’t believe some of what I’m hearing here” (Gregory Meeks of New York)—failed to shake him awake.

What was going through Stumpf’s head? New research suggests that the better question may be: What wasn’t going through it?

The historian Henry Adams was being metaphorical, not medical, when he described power as “a sort of tumor that ends by killing the victim’s sympathies.” But that’s not far from where Dacher Keltner, a psychology professor at UC Berkeley, ended up after years of lab and field experiments. Subjects under the influence of power, he found in studies spanning two decades, acted as if they had suffered a traumatic brain injury—becoming more impulsive, less risk-aware, and, crucially, less adept at seeing things from other people’s point of view.

MOST POPULAR

Sukhvinder Obhi, a neuroscientist at McMaster University, in Ontario, recently described something similar. Unlike Keltner, who studies behaviors, Obhi studies brains. And when he put the heads of the powerful and the not-so-powerful under a transcranial-magnetic-stimulation machine, he found that power, in fact, impairs a specific neural process, “mirroring,” that may be a cornerstone of empathy. Which gives a neurological basis to what Keltner has termed the “power paradox”: Once we have power, we lose some of the capacities we needed to gain it in the first place.

That loss in capacity has been demonstrated in various creative ways. A 2006 study asked participants to draw the letter E on their forehead for others to view—a task that requires seeing yourself from an observer’s vantage point. Those feeling powerful were three times more likely to draw the E the right way to themselves—and backwards to everyone else (which calls to mind George W. Bush, who memorably held up the American flag backwards at the 2008 Olympics). Other experiments have shown that powerful people do worse at identifying what someone in a picture is feeling, or guessing how a colleague might interpret a remark.

The fact that people tend to mimic the expressions and body language of their superiors can aggravate this problem: Subordinates provide few reliable cues to the powerful. But more important, Keltner says, is the fact that the powerful stop mimicking others. Laughing when others laugh or tensing when others tense does more than ingratiate. It helps trigger the same feelings those others are experiencing and provides a window into where they are coming from. Powerful people “stop simulating the experience of others,” Keltner says, which leads to what he calls an “empathy deficit.”

Mirroring is a subtler kind of mimicry that goes on entirely within our heads, and without our awareness. When we watch someone perform an action, the part of the brain we would use to do that same thing lights up in sympathetic response. It might be best understood as vicarious experience. It’s what Obhi and his team were trying to activate when they had their subjects watch a video of someone’s hand squeezing a rubber ball.

For nonpowerful participants, mirroring worked fine: The neural pathways they would use to squeeze the ball themselves fired strongly. But the powerful group’s? Less so.

Was the mirroring response broken? More like anesthetized. None of the participants possessed permanent power. They were college students who had been “primed” to feel potent by recounting an experience in which they had been in charge. The anesthetic would presumably wear off when the feeling did—their brains weren’t structurally damaged after an afternoon in the lab. But if the effect had been long-lasting—say, by dint of having Wall Street analysts whispering their greatness quarter after quarter, board members offering them extra helpings of pay, and Forbes praising them for “doing well while doing good”—they may have what in medicine is known as “functional” changes to the brain.

I wondered whether the powerful might simply stop trying to put themselves in others’ shoes, without losing the ability to do so. As it happened, Obhi ran a subsequent study that may help answer that question. This time, subjects were told what mirroring was and asked to make a conscious effort to increase or decrease their response. “Our results,” he and his co-author, Katherine Naish, wrote, “showed no difference.” Effort didn’t help.

This is a depressing finding. Knowledge is supposed to be power. But what good is knowing that power deprives you of knowledge?

The sunniest possible spin, it seems, is that these changes are only sometimes harmful. Power, the research says, primes our brain to screen out peripheral information. In most situations, this provides a helpful efficiency boost. In social ones, it has the unfortunate side effect of making us more obtuse. Even that is not necessarily bad for the prospects of the powerful, or the groups they lead. As Susan Fiske, a Princeton psychology professor, has persuasively argued, power lessens the need for a nuanced read of people, since it gives us command of resources we once had to cajole from others. But of course, in a modern organization, the maintenance of that command relies on some level of organizational support. And the sheer number of examples of executive hubris that bristle from the headlines suggests that many leaders cross the line into counterproductive folly.

Less able to make out people’s individuating traits, they rely more heavily on stereotype. And the less they’re able to see, other research suggests, the more they rely on a personal “vision” for navigation. John Stumpf saw a Wells Fargo where every customer had eight separate accounts. (As he’d often noted to employees, eight rhymes with great.) “Cross-selling,” he told Congress, “is shorthand for deepening relationships.”

Is there nothing to be done?

No and yes. It’s difficult to stop power’s tendency to affect your brain. What’s easier—from time to time, at least—is to stop feeling powerful.

Insofar as it affects the way we think, power, Keltner reminded me, is not a post or a position but a mental state. Recount a time you did not feel powerful, his experiments suggest, and your brain can commune with reality.

Recalling an early experience of powerlessness seems to work for some people—and experiences that were searing enough may provide a sort of permanent protection. An incredible study published in The Journal of Finance last February found that CEOs who as children had lived through a natural disaster that produced significant fatalities were much less risk-seeking than CEOs who hadn’t. (The one problem, says Raghavendra Rau, a co-author of the study and a Cambridge University professor, is that CEOs who had lived through disasters without significant fatalities were more risk-seeking.)

But tornadoes, volcanoes, and tsunamis aren’t the only hubris-restraining forces out there. PepsiCo CEO and Chairman Indra Nooyi sometimes tells the story of the day she got the news of her appointment to the company’s board, in 2001. She arrived home percolating in her own sense of importance and vitality, when her mother asked whether, before she delivered her “great news,” she would go out and get some milk. Fuming, Nooyi went out and got it. “Leave that damn crown in the garage” was her mother’s advice when she returned.

The point of the story, really, is that Nooyi tells it. It serves as a useful reminder about ordinary obligation and the need to stay grounded. Nooyi’s mother, in the story, serves as a “toe holder,” a term once used by the political adviser Louis Howe to describe his relationship with the four-term President Franklin D. Roosevelt, whom Howe never stopped calling Franklin.

For Winston Churchill, the person who filled that role was his wife, Clementine, who had the courage to write, “My Darling Winston. I must confess that I have noticed a deterioration in your manner; & you are not as kind as you used to be.” Written on the day Hitler entered Paris, torn up, then sent anyway, the letter was not a complaint but an alert: Someone had confided to her, she wrote, that Churchill had been acting “so contemptuous” toward subordinates in meetings that “no ideas, good or bad, will be forthcoming”—with the attendant danger that “you won’t get the best results.”

Lord David Owen—a British neurologist turned parliamentarian who served as the foreign secretary before becoming a baron—recounts both Howe’s story and Clementine Churchill’s in his 2008 book, In Sickness and in Power, an inquiry into the various maladies that had affected the performance of British prime ministers and American presidents since 1900. While some suffered from strokes (Woodrow Wilson), substance abuse (Anthony Eden), or possibly bipolar disorder (Lyndon B. Johnson, Theodore Roosevelt), at least four others acquired a disorder that the medical literature doesn’t recognize but, Owen argues, should.

“Hubris syndrome,” as he and a co-author, Jonathan Davidson, defined it in a 2009 article published in Brain, “is a disorder of the possession of power, particularly power which has been associated with overwhelming success, held for a period of years and with minimal constraint on the leader.” Its 14 clinical features include: manifest contempt for others, loss of contact with reality, restless or reckless actions, and displays of incompetence. In May, the Royal Society of Medicine co-hosted a conference of the Daedalus Trust—an organization that Owen founded for the study and prevention of hubris.

I asked Owen, who admits to a healthy predisposition to hubris himself, whether anything helps keep him tethered to reality, something that other truly powerful figures might emulate. He shared a few strategies: thinking back on hubris-dispelling episodes from his past; watching documentaries about ordinary people; making a habit of reading constituents’ letters.

But I surmised that the greatest check on Owen’s hubris today might stem from his recent research endeavors. Businesses, he complained to me, had shown next to no appetite for research on hubris. Business schools were not much better. The undercurrent of frustration in his voice attested to a certain powerlessness. Whatever the salutary effect on Owen, it suggests that a malady seen too commonly in boardrooms and executive suites is unlikely to soon find a cure.

post-image
quotes
ES postlanguage-image
05/06/2018

El GBPUSD retrocede de nuevo hacia los máximos de ayer y trata de mantener a los compradores al mando

author-image

By Greg Michalowski @GregMikeFX, Director of Client Education at ForexLive. Translated by Wordwide FX Financial Translations

El par se detiene bajo la MM de 100 sesiones en el gráfico de 4 horas, lo cual sugiere que la batalla entre compradores y vendedores sigue en pie.

Hoy, el GBPUSD ha subido con fuerza en reacción al PMI del sector servicios, que se ha saldado mejor de lo esperado.

 

Sin embargo, al igual que sucedió ayer, el precio  superó la MM de 100 sesiones en el gráfico de 4 horas (línea azul en el gráfico superior), que se sitúa en 1,33936. El máximo de hoy se ha situado en 1,33915. El ataque de hoy ha sido más serio que el de ayer. Como referencia, os comento que la última vez que el precio escaló sobre esta media móvil fue el 19 de abril, ya hace algunas semanas…

El precio superó el nivel de resistencia arriba y volvió a atacar los últimos máximos en giro registrados el jueves de la semana pasada en 1,33478 (el mínimo de hoy alcanzó 1,33442). Ahora mismo operamos entre este nivel abajo y la MM de 100 sesiones arriba. En medio está el 38,2% en 1,33615.

Si echamos un vistazo al gráfico de cinco minutos (abajo), veremos que la corrección de la acción alcista también se detuvo cerca del 50% del rango del día y de la MM de 100 sesiones, en trayectoria ascendente (línea azul en 1,33468). Esta combinación de factores técnicos da cierto impulso al par. Esta media móvil y este 50% nos darán pistas sobre el sesgo del precio para la jornada de hoy. Si aguantamos arriba, los compradores mantendrán un poco más el control. Si bajamos, es posible que los que querían recuperar terreno y que no lo consiguieron contra la MM de 100 sesiones en el gráfico de 4 horas, arriba, se retiren.

Puedes leer el análisis original en inglés en ForexLive, aquí.

post-image