Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The Marshmallow Test: What Does It Really Measure?

theatlantic.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

251–260 of 282 posts

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

#251

Post by aidenn0 »

RyanZAG wrote: post #134
finolex1 wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 knowled…

If I withhold knowledge of where my gun is from my angry friend who wants to kill someone, that benefits two people that are not myself (my friend who would likely go to jail, and the person he is planning to kill).

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

#252

Post by ryan-allen »

arpa wrote: post #224
paulddraper wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The important factor is your parents income, not your "willpower". Or perhaps the opposite is true. Maybe all the studies that reference parental income "should" be referencing the child's willpower. Maybe willpower is the most important/influential trait, and we should be looking at the several factors increase willpower: parental income, parenting technique X, an inherited willpower gene, etc.

Yes, because the more willpower your child has, the more income you will have!

I'm gonna make my kid clean his room _real good_, can't wait for the pay rise.

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

#253

Post by ItsMe000001 »

Retric wrote: post #151
ItsMe000001 wrote: post #123

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3198075/ The link between poverty and obesity in the modern world is well established. That means you can hardly point to a lack of energy consumption. I added a video to my comment, from a bio.chem course, that shows a common pathway how high energy state leads to obesity. Note that I can't and don't want to (and don't need to) show very much here, only provide an argumen…

The point about low calories is veggies are inherently an extra and not a staple. You need to add veggies to your diet and can't simply replace a plate of rice and beans with them. The preference for low cost per calorie foods makes it easy to over eat when your body is missing some nutrient. Which can create offial feedback loops. But, the simple "how do I eat for 20$ this week" is IMO a factor at the individual and…

The point about calories was invalid, as I clearly pointed out. There is a problem of too much, there is no problem of not enough. And energy-rich carbs are cheap. So nothing remains of that argument, it was just silly!

> The preference for low cost per calorie foods makes it easy to over eat when your body is missing some nutrient.

Exactly.

If you agree with me, what's your point? I argued against your very specific - and very silly - argument in your first reply, which makes no sense whatsoever and is completely made up and artificial. See my response!

Please stop making stuff up and reply to what I actually wrote or not at all. I hate it when people make stuff up and pretend to "counter" my comment when they completely ignore it and make stuff up.

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

#254

Post by letsgetphysITal »

neonate wrote: post #215
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 fu…

> 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.

The Marshmallow Test is something the lay person can understand, and comes with a great real-world demonstration, accurate or not. Other measures require more field-specific knowledge or statistics education to understand.

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

#255

Post by vanderZwan »

tqi wrote: post #245
vanderZwan wrote: post #241

Earlier quoted context omitted.

FYI, it looks like you linked to a different comment, and I can't find the one you quoted

I think it was this one: https://twitter.com/hamandcheese/status/1001166897113595906

Thanks! It did not show up for me in the replies when scrolling down

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

#256

Post by Retric »

ItsMe000001 wrote: post #253
Retric wrote: post #151

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The point about low calories is veggies are inherently an extra and not a staple. You need to add veggies to your diet and can't simply replace a plate of rice and beans with them. The preference for low cost per calorie foods makes it easy to over eat when your body is missing some nutrient. Which can create offial feedback loops. But, the simple "how do I eat for 20$ this week" is IMO a factor at the individual and…

The point about calories was invalid, as I clearly pointed out. There is a problem of too much , there is no problem of not enough. And energy-rich carbs are cheap . So nothing remains of that argument, it was just silly! > The preference for low cost per calorie foods makes it easy to over eat when your body is missing some nutrient. Exactly. If you agree with me, what's your point? I argued against your very specif…

I think you are failing to grasp the price differences and my argument.

You can become obese eating rice and beans for less than the 1.50$ per day. Morbid obesity on cheap calorie dense food is cheaper than a healthy diet. This trend continues if you look at fast food or any quick options.

So, no being fat is not cost prohibitive, but eating veggies is. Further, as I said if you eat empty calories like Purple Drank you still need nutrition and again eating calorie dense foods and extra calories costs less than veggies.

This has social consequences as fewer people eat healthy foods they become less accessible, and culture adapted to eating cheap means all food options are high calorie.

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

#257

Post by paulddraper »

arpa wrote: post #224
paulddraper wrote: post #207

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The important factor is your parents income, not your "willpower". Or perhaps the opposite is true. Maybe all the studies that reference parental income "should" be referencing the child's willpower. Maybe willpower is the most important/influential trait, and we should be looking at the several factors increase willpower: parental income, parenting technique X, an inherited willpower gene, etc.

Yes, because the more willpower your child has, the more income you will have!

Yes, this studies suggests that is precisely the correlation.

As for causation, see Confounding Variable [1]. The hypothical Willpower gene is the root cause of your wealth and your child's willpower.

[1] https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confounding

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

#258

Post by SketchySeaBeast »

_red wrote: post #150
stochastic_monk wrote: post #133

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

Why did your parents seek to create a household which avoided sugary snacks? The fact is, that itself could be representative of the genetic predisposition towards self-control.

It could also be indicative of poor self-control - if you know that buying the cereal means you'll eat it too quick, it's easier to avoid buying it than not eating it once you have it.

I'm not saying that's the case here, but self control can cut both ways.

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

#259

Post by wst_ »

If I am not mistaken article didn't mention kids age? Anyone knows? I assume above 3 (judging by paragraph about home environment.) The thing is, above certain age it would be very easy to get kids into a challenge and make them to wait. Not to mention that marshmallow may not be a treat for anyone.

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

#260

Post by millermp12 »

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.

"making the knowledge public can only lead to a sense of fatalism"

that was also one of the arguments against a heliocentric view of the universe. Time was not kind to that position.

Post reply on HN