The Marshmallow Test Revisited
washingtonpost.com
The Marshmallow Test Revisited
1–10 of 34 posts
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#2Perhaps what the first study actually discovered, unbeknownst to the original researchers, is that children from homes in which the guardians are reliable turn out to be more prosperous in life. Therefore, what was actually being measured, wasn't the self control of the children, but a proxy for the reliability of the adults in their life.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#3The interesting bit in the original experiment seemed to be the kids who'd say they'll wait for 15mins, but then succumb to the temptation of the marshmallow in front of them and eat it while waiting. Any rational (inductive) bit ought may be expected to be completed before the wait started.
PS: Will be good if such article writers link to the paper, or at least the abstract.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#4When I saw the title, I originally thought of:
http://marshmallowchallenge.com/Welcome.html
I think the above is a more interesting challenge. Particularly because there is a magical point where the kids or even adults realize that they just have to start playing with the spaghetti - can't just stare at it.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#5Notice what they downplay in this article: That almost half of the kids who had just been in contact with a reliable adult still ate the marshmallow.
Also, were the kids allowed to keep playing with the fun art supplies while they waited?
A link to the actual study would help.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#6Perhaps what the first study actually discovered, unbeknownst to the original researchers, is that children from homes in which the guardians are reliable turn out to be more prosperous in life. Therefore, what was actually being measured, wasn't the self control of the children, but a proxy for the reliability of the adults in their life.
While that's a tempting conclusion, it's a tough to justify. The original experiment didn't study or account for the parental variable, so it's impossible to tell what effect it may, or may not, have had "behind the scenes."
It's entirely possible that the reliability of adults is a factor in developing a child's impulse control. It's also possible that it's a significant factor. But we'd have to design experiments to study its significance. Furthermore, it seems unlikely that the variable being studied in the original experiment, impulse control, was actually just a red herring disguising parental reliability as the true factor.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#7Whenever I meet a new kid, I mentally classify them as either a "one marshmallow child" or a "two marshmallow child" based on what I think the result woud be if they took the marshmallow test. One thing I have noticed is that there is a strong correlation between one marshmallow kids and one marshmallow parents.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#8Did any of the kids eat one marshmallow and then trick the study administrators into giving them the other two marshmallows? Those are the kids that are going to be founders.
Maybe I'm reaching.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#9Perhaps what the first study actually discovered, unbeknownst to the original researchers, is that children from homes in which the guardians are reliable turn out to be more prosperous in life. Therefore, what was actually being measured, wasn't the self control of the children, but a proxy for the reliability of the adults in their life.
While that's a tempting conclusion, it's a tough to justify. The original experiment didn't study or account for the parental variable, so it's impossible to tell what effect it may, or may not, have had "behind the scenes." It's entirely possible that the reliability of adults is a factor in developing a child's impulse control. It's also possible that it's a significant factor. But we'd have to design experiments t…
To be clear (and I don't think you are implying this, I just want to be explicit) -I'm not suggesting that the adults impacted the development of the child's impulse control - I'm extrapolating from the cited paper towards a quite different conclusion. If their conclusion is accurate, that children are rational actors in the face of uncertainty (that is, if the children asses that future rewards are more or less likely to happen based on their assessment of the other adults in the children's life) - then what I'm suggesting is that the original study had a group of rational players, and what the scientists were measuring, wasn't impulse control of the children (which I'm suggesting might be innately consistent across the group, or at least not revealed in this study) - but instead, was identifying how reliable the guardians and adults in these children's life were. It stands to reason, that children growing up in stable households, would have a better chance of being prosperous in life, than those who grew up in unstable, unreliable homes.
Re: The Marshmallow Test Revisited
#10Did any of the kids eat one marshmallow and then trick the study administrators into giving them the other two marshmallows? Those are the kids that are going to be founders. Maybe I'm reaching.
Would be interesting if there were. I remember always having a knack for having the cake and eating it too as a child.