The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure? • Hacker News Board

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#131

Post by haihaibye » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:17 PM UTC

TomMckenny wrote: post #55

orbifold wrote: post #22

I've come across variations of this conclusion many times now: That it is really your parents affluence and educational background that predicts your success in school and how much you will earn in the future. This is often portrayed as being unjust. To me it always seemed obvious that children with affluent and well educated parents are more likely to be intelligent, have good self-control and other traits that are…

The study and article literally say that kids in a given socio-economic group have the same life outcomes whether the grab the marshmallow or not. And not just here but the notion that hereditary wealth correlates to intelligence has been endlessly refuted. But if it were true, wouldn't it mean that blue counties, being richer than red counties, have a much higher average IQ?

> hereditary wealth correlates to intelligence has been endlessly refuted.

Source?

There's noise and luck (and IQ wasn't so much a factor for income historically) but given the following, how could it not be true?

Intelligence leads to higher income (med school etc)

Income leads to higher wealth

Wealth is partly inherited.

Intelligence is partly inherited.

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#132

Post by CM30 » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:24 PM UTC

Makes me wonder what happens if the kid simply doesn't like eating marshmallows. Would that also be counted as them putting it off, or is the test set up in such a way that said people are counted out beforehand?

Hell, it seems someone's taste in general may affect the results for any of these tests. Much easier to put off something you only sort of like rather than something you're obssessed with...

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#133

Post by stochastic_monk » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:28 PM UTC

comboy wrote: post #130

abainbridge wrote: post #9

> The researchers also, when analyzing their test’s results, controlled for certain factors—such as the income of a child’s household Is that a valid thing to do? If "will power" was a strongly inherited trait, and the theory is that will power leads to increase household income in adult life, then this controlling would remove most of the signal. The original paper relied partly on a questionnaire that asked the par…

Marshmallows represent different value for kids with different background. Some can have them every day, for some it's something they only saw other kids eating. It's similar to how it would be easy to risk $50K for somebody with $100M net worth compared to somebody whose net worth is $100K.

I grew up in a household without sugary cereals. My siblings and I would sing songs and dance with excitement when we had them. Socioeconomic status certainly explains the difference between cohorts, but perhaps it’s the easier signal to catch while the core mechanism is a matter of what is available in one’s household.

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#134

Post by RyanZAG » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:29 PM UTC

finolex1 wrote: post #16

yasp wrote: post #2

Has anyone studied whether time preference might be genetically heritable? Edit: why am I being downvoted for this?

Because it's closely related to research on the genetic basis of intelligence. Poor research on these topics in the past have been used to justify rather egregious social policies (eugenics, birth control, racial discrimination, etc). Even if it is heritable, making the knowledge public can only lead to a sense of fatalism.

> Even if it is heritable, making the knowledge public can only lead to a sense of fatalism.

That's a really terrible way to look at the world, and has caused a lot of suffering. It's the very basis of the term 'heretic' that has caused so much loss throughout human history.

No human ever has the right to deny knowledge to another for their own benefit, because humans are not able to accurately determine what knowledge is or is not harmful for others to hold. Often their choice to withhold knowledge causes the most harm of all.

EDIT: Thinking about it more, 'the right' is not correct. Withholding knowledge can be a malicious or competitive activity, but can never be a beneficial one. Ie, you have the right to withhold knowledge from your enemies to harm them, or withhold knowledge from competitors to increase your chances of winning. But you need to be clear on this with yourself: you're not withholding knowledge for anyone's benefit but your own.

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#135

Post by CM30 » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:33 PM UTC

joosteto wrote: post #64

fvdessen wrote: post #58

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Is poverty really linked to food scarcity in western countries anymore ? The statistics show that overall, the poor are fatter than the rich.

Often the poor are fat because healthy food is more expensive. So yes, scarcity of healthy food is linked to poverty.

Healthy food isn't really more expensive. The price of the food depends a lot more on the shop it's being sold in than the particular item.

Nah, I think it really comes down to a mix of:

1. Many poorer people have jobs with longer/more awkward hours, and it's easier to buy unhealthy food in a rush/at an inconvenient time. Your local greengrocers/butchers shop/whatever likely closes at about 5PM whereas the corner shop stays open till the wee hours of the morning/doesn't close at all. And if you're in a rush, unhealthy food is often quicker to prepare/sold prepared based on whether you're talking microwave dinners or fast food.

2. Many poorer areas are food deserts, or at least have a lack of decent shops. For instance, over where I currently live, there are about 4 different supermarkets, local grocery shops, butcher's shops, bakeries, fishmongers, etc and every other kind of place to buy food you can imagine.

This means it's somewhat convenient to buy something healthy at almost any time of day.

On the other hand, if your only choices in walking distance are a corner shop, petrol station or pound store, the choices for healthy food are a fair bit less, and its more convenient to buy something unhealthy than travel to the shops elsewhere.

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#136

Post by heavenlyblue » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:35 PM UTC

Thinking that the only reason poor kids would prefer to eat the first marshmallow due to having a low willpower is incredibly shallow: what if the kid had an experience in life that tells him that no matter how credible the source is, the second marshmallow has a huge probability of never coming; or for what's it worth - they'll take away both of them since the child tried to be "smart”?

Edit: came here to attack the article, but turns out my opinion is actially the opinion of the article in the first place. They actually do say that this test is not actually a test of willpower.

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#137

Post by jasode » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:37 PM UTC

Smaug123 wrote: post #124

jasode wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>, but for a "generalised ability/desire to take and pass tests [...] the desire to pass the Marshmallow test). [...] You and the blog you linked are getting sidetracked by the word "test" in "Marshmallow Test". You're thinking of academic/schooling connotations of "test" instead of the scientific observations of a "test". I'd suggest to rewrite the "Marshmallow Test" in the brain as "Marshmallow Experiment". It is t…

But the Marshmallow Test is a test! The child is told not to eat the marshmallow (maybe not in so many words), so there's an obvious correct answer to the test ("don't eat the marshmallow"), and some people are motivated to take that answer because they are motivated to do well when they are being tested. My own history is full of this kind of incident. EDIT: to clarify, the Marshmallow Test is a test when viewed by…

>But the Marshmallow Test is a test!

>, so there's an obvious _correct_ answer

>because they are motivated to do _well_

>not _pass_ it.

Again, you're still misinterpreting the word "test" in "Marshmallow Test". (Also keep in mind that "marshmallow test" isn't what the Stanford researchers called it.[1] The "Marshmallow Test" was only colloquial shorthand for behavioral experiments.)

When you use the phrases "correct", "do well", "pass", it means you're repeating the same mistake of applying your post-hoc reasoning of "test" to 4-year old brains.

Thinking that "waiting for 2 marshmallows" is the _correct_ answer is the wrong framework to use.

This is not a school test where "2+3" where "5" is correct and "8" is incorrect.

This is a psychological test where "test" means a contrived social apparatus to observe behavioral choices. This means that "choosing not to wait and immediately consume 1 marshmallow" is also the _correct_ answer.

The child is given a choice where he/she must weigh an uncertain future with a certain present desire. There is no right or wrong answer. There is no pass or fail. There are only choices and observations of those choices.

For example, one of the criticisms of the "Marshmallow Experiment" is that the researchers were actually measuring "trust & reliability of adults" vs "delayed gratification". In other words, the way we label the behavorial experiments will distort our view of what we think the "correct" answer is.

E.g. if Johnny was told in the past by his mother that if he stopped pulling his sister's hair in the car, he'd get a treat when they got home. However, his monther didn't followup on that promise. Therefore, when the researcher gives him a choice between 1 marshmallow now or 2 if he waited until later, it means the 4-year old's "optimization" of the uncertain future is to take the 1 marshmallow now. This is the "correct" answer for him.

[1] http://www.viriya.net/jabref/cognitive_and_attentional_mecha...

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#138

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:42 PM UTC

heavenlyblue wrote: post #136

Thinking that the only reason poor kids would prefer to eat the first marshmallow due to having a low willpower is incredibly shallow: what if the kid had an experience in life that tells him that no matter how credible the source is, the second marshmallow has a huge probability of never coming; or for what's it worth - they'll take away both of them since the child tried to be "smart”? Edit: came here to attack the…

[deleted]

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#139

Post by [deleted] » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:44 PM UTC

gcthomas wrote: post #7

I see so many forum discussions where posters criticise the poor for their 'weak' decisions and effectively blame the poor for their own plight. Why don't they just work harder and earn the money to pay for their healthcare and education? they say. It is easy to withhold funding from deprived areas if you convince yourself that it is their own fault. These results should be on the front pages of newspapers and on TV…

[deleted]

Re: The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

#140

Post by washadjeffmad » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 1:52 PM UTC

CM30 wrote: post #132

Makes me wonder what happens if the kid simply doesn't like eating marshmallows. Would that also be counted as them putting it off, or is the test set up in such a way that said people are counted out beforehand? Hell, it seems someone's taste in general may affect the results for any of these tests. Much easier to put off something you only sort of like rather than something you're obssessed with...

Since there's nothing inherently appealing about marshmallows to children, an assortment of interesting looking treats could have been presented, and the children should have ranked them in terms of how much they wanted to try each. Then they could perform the test with each and the outcomes could be compared by the weighted values.

They did the marshmallow test with me as a child, and I thought it was dumb because I didn't like marshmallows; of course I wasn't eager to eat one. When we got the reward, I gave mine away to a kid who ate theirs initially. Had it been a puzzle they asked us not to touch, it might have gone differently.

It's a very subjective test and can easily underestimate the children's preferences.