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

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

#211

Post by marketgod » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 6:45 PM UTC

wgerard wrote: post #204

marketgod wrote: post #193

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It always perplexed me why the people who were great at math could not figure out how to spin the ball of the backboard and score from anywhere on the court without athleticism required.

I'm sure they could, or at least approximate it to a close degree. But even if you determine the proper amount of force and launch angle for a given position, that doesn't mean you'll be able to actually execute. Also, of course, basketball isn't played in a vacuum. No defender is going to let you sit there and calculate the proper trajectory or let you shoot the ball unimpeded. A much better example would be pool -…

I was rethinking this, what about the corner 3? Shooting it wide open/with a defender running up against you looking to block.

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

#212

Post by Izkata » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:11 PM UTC

Cogito wrote: post #172

jasode wrote: post #137

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>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…

I don't think they are misinterpreting anything, just explaining their point in a way that looks like misinterpretation to you :D Let me try another way. 1. Some children, of which I would have been an example, when sat down and told about the marshmallows will interpret this interaction as a test . 2. Believing that they are being tested, some of these children, of which I would also have been an example, will want…

Alternative to #3, of which I would have been an example:

Taking the treat immediately (such as a cookie without asking, or desert before dinner) is a straight failure. No marshmallow-maximizing involved.

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

#213

Post by Izkata » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:17 PM UTC

Smaug123 wrote: post #20

I found the following post [1] to make a very compelling argument that the Marshmallow test isn't really testing for the ability to defer gratification, but for a "generalised ability/desire to take and pass tests" (manifesting itself here as the desire to pass the Marshmallow test). The post argues that this is an underrecognised character trait which can predict success in today's Western test-oriented world. Certa…

> When my friends said I was a “genius,” I would sort-of-joke that I didn’t know anything but could score 75% on any test with a Scantron.

This was a common sentiment among me and my friends in highschool. Much of the time, one or two of the answers to any given multiple-choice question were obviously wrong, and quite often another could be eliminated just because we knew the teacher or their previous tests well enough.

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

#214

Post by dang » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:17 PM UTC

fnord123 wrote: post #209

booleandilemma wrote: post #202

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Maybe the people who devise IQ tests are bad at sports? I’m only partially joking.

It was indeed developed by an Ashkenazi.

Please don't; the cost of the genre dwarfs the benefit of the factoid.

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

#215

Post by neonate » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:21 PM UTC

joosteto wrote: post #97

Response by one of the original authors: https://jasoncollins.blog/2018/05/31/the-marshmallow-test-he...

Good link, but that's not one of the original authors, assuming you meant of the Marshmallow study.

Edit: I enjoyed the post, but his point turns out to be a relatively narrow one:

The other headline from the replication is that the predictive ability of the marshmallow test disappears with controls. That is, if you account for the children’s socioeconomic status [etc...], the marshmallow test does not provide any further information about that future achievement. It’s no surprise that controls of this nature do this. It simply suggests that the controls are better predictors. The original claim was not that the marshmallow test was the best or only predictor.

Such a defense of the original claim makes sense in an academic context but doesn't touch on why the marshmallow study made it into pop culture in the first place. That was because of what it seemed to suggest about character and self-control. The new study puts quite a different spin on that, as Collins agrees:

What is called into question are the implications that have been drawn from the marshmallow test studies.

The fact that those implications weren't part of Shoda, Mischel, and Peake's original study is good to know, but not the most important thing for non-specialists.

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

#216

Post by troupe » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:27 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.

In general access to candy every day is something I see more at the low end of the income spectrum and less at the high end.

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

#217

Post by jabgrabdthrow » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:34 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.

Reminds me of how I grew up wishing I could eat cereal and watch TV - at all.

It’s good to know that it’s my parents’ active decisions to shape how I think, and not something I can’t control like my innate willpower, which led me to be so successful.

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

#218

Post by troupe » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:40 PM UTC

CM30 wrote: post #135

joosteto wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 sho…

I think there is some truth in what you are saying, but if that is true then people without jobs getting SNAP benefits would tend toward buying healthier food. That isn't the general trend I see in the people I've worked with. Most of them tended toward buying highly processed food and it wasn't because they didn't have time to prepare meals.

I did work with one family who was very concerned about eating healthy, but they would tend to buy the absolutely most expensive food they could find thinking it was healthier and then running out of food halfway through the month.

I'm not saying there aren't people who buy unhealthy food because they can't find healthy food, but I see a lot more people hampered by poor life skills leading too poor food choices than grocery store closing hours.

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

#219

Post by jabgrabdthrow » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:40 PM UTC

Barrin92 wrote: post #184

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…

>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. If some underlying willpower was the cause for the behaviour and willpower would lead to better outcomes, then there would be differentation between children within the same income bracket who score different on this test, right? Bu…

Wait a second, when did the discussion narrow to standardized test scores? I only read the article and did not follow through with sources, it seemed to imply “success” was measured more broadly, by their end socioeconomic status.

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

#220

Post by nitwit005 » Sun, Jun 03, 2018, 7:43 PM UTC

ghusbands wrote: post #80

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.

Yes. "America's dirty little secret: 42 million people are suffering from hunger" https://www.cnbc.com/2016/12/13/americas-dirty-little-secret... UK: "Child poverty: Pale and hungry pupils 'fill pockets with school food'" http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-43611527 "Germany’s hidden hunger: On the breadline in Europe’s richest country" http://edition.cnn.com/interactive/2017/09/world/germany-foo...

I'm honestly never sure how seriously to take those sorts of statistics. They tend to be based on participation in food programs, which doesn't tell you that much.

Deaths due to malnutrition are quite rare now, generally being confined to cases of abuse or niglect, while it used to be a normal cause of death.