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

171–180 of 282 posts

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

#171

Post by lmkg »

jasode wrote: post #137
Smaug123 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

I think you're misunderstanding The Desire To Pass Tests, and GP's point about it.

One choice of the Marshmallow Test results in a bigger number and one choice results in a smaller number. To a person with The Desire To Pass Tests, this is interpreted as equivalent to the score on a school test. In other words, the bigger number signals that one answer is correct, to someone who looks out for those signals.

This is not saying that the choice is correct, in an inherent sense, and I think that's what you're getting hung up on. The Marshmallow Test measures behavior choices and there's no objective correct answer, but those behavior choices may have a reason or a reasoning framework behind them. And that reasoning framework may be an already-instilled belief that given two options, one option is correct and it's important to choose that option. In other words, the behavioral choice is to treat the experiment as a school test and try to pass that test.

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

#172

Post by Cogito »

jasode wrote: post #137
Smaug123 wrote: post #124

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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…

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 to pass the test.

3. Based on previous experience, some of these children, of which I would have been an example, will believe that they pass the test if they get the maximum number of marshmallows.

To be fair, what I would have considered the correct answer may have depended on how exactly the scenario was described to me, but considering various options I think almost every time I would have thought waiting was the correct action - this is obviously through the lens of hindsight rationalisation so I have no way to support this idea.

All that aside, it appears that even if having some desire to pass tests makes a child more inclined to "pass" the Marshmallow Test, it doesn't provide any significant predictive power on the outcome that was measured when you also account for the socio-economic factors discussed in the article.

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

#173

Post by eanzenberg »

jakobegger wrote: post #159
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…

> this controlling would remove most of the signal That's the whole point of controlling. If all of your signal can be explained by a correllation, then you aren't measuring what you think you are. If "willpower" (waiting for second marshmallow) was important, it would be important regardless of whether your parents are rich or not. This means that among poor kids, those with willpower would be more successful, and a…

If willpower is the strongest indicator for income then controlling for parent’s income leads to some strange circular reasoning: willpower is not a strong influence of income when controlling for income.

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

#174

Post by thegabez »

lkrubner wrote: post #154

About this: " This new paper found that among kids whose mothers had a college degree, those who waited for a second marshmallow did no better in the long run—in terms of standardized test scores and mothers’ reports of their children’s behavior—than those who dug right in. " Since "standardized test scores" tends to measure IQ, it seems this can be re-phrased as "those who did well on the will-power test did not nec…

Now that I think about it how is athleticism not considered a parameter of IQ? If you can learn to shoot a basketball 10x faster and with more accuracy than me, isn't your brain learning faster than mine?

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

#175

Post by craftyguy »

thegabez wrote: post #174
lkrubner wrote: post #154

About this: " This new paper found that among kids whose mothers had a college degree, those who waited for a second marshmallow did no better in the long run—in terms of standardized test scores and mothers’ reports of their children’s behavior—than those who dug right in. " Since "standardized test scores" tends to measure IQ, it seems this can be re-phrased as "those who did well on the will-power test did not nec…

Now that I think about it how is athleticism not considered a parameter of IQ? If you can learn to shoot a basketball 10x faster and with more accuracy than me, isn't your brain learning faster than mine?

Motor skills and muscle memory vs brain thinkings stuff (logic, analysis, problem solving, etc). I don't know what the difference is between the two in terms of how much brain activity and ability they require, but it seems like there would be a difference.

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

#176

Post by jasode »

lmkg wrote: post #171
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 think you're misunderstanding The Desire To Pass Tests, and GP's point about it. One choice of the Marshmallow Test results in a bigger number and one choice results in a smaller number. To a person with The Desire To Pass Tests, this is interpreted as equivalent to the score on a school test. In other words, the bigger number signals that one answer is correct, to someone who looks out for those signals. This is n…

Reply to both Cogito and lmkg since they are similar counterpoints:

>Cogito: "maximum number of marshmallows"*

>lmkg: "the bigger number signals that one answer is correct,"

If the child doesn't trust or believe the researcher (a stranger), then in his mind, the 1 marshmallow is a bigger number than zero marshmallows promised later. Because "later" could translate to "never", and "2 marshmallows" could translate to "0 marshmallows".

Is it possible for a few, or some of the very young 4-year old children to meta-analyze the situation and conclude "you can't trick me, this is really a test!" ??

Sure, but Smaug123 contended that this reasoning process generalized to the test population.

If we want to entertain the fact that children want to "please" adults to "pass a test", we also have to accept that they can interpret the situation as "evaluating promises of future rewards being kept or broken" and rationally choose 1 marshmallow as the optimum decision. Choosing 1 now is also "passing a test" if we insist on framing it as a "test" in the vein of Hercules 12 labors. ("See mom, you told me to never trust strangers and so I got the 1 marshmallow right away.")

If we still want to hang on to the idea that 4-year olds keep reinterpreting life interactions as a "test to pass", a lot of frustrated parents are going to wonder... "why can't Johnny see that keeping to himself instead of pulling his sisters hair to get a piece of candy later is a TEST TO PASS?!? He just keeps misbehaving!" both wanted & unwanted behaviors) with a framework of "desire to pass a test" is overestimating its explanatory power.

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

#177

Post by MikkoFinell »

Rexxar wrote: post #94
MikkoFinell wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you were able to think of a couple confounding factors off the top of your head, but you dismiss the idea that the researchers had considered those factors and controlled for it? Despite the fact that their full time job it is to think about things like that, and their careers are on the line if they embarrass themselves by disregarding something as obvious and trivial like that? Did you even read the original pap…

What you say is essentially an appeal to authority. The questions of wombat92 are legitimate and it is the job of the journalist to answer them in the article. "They are professional, they know their job" is not a valid scientific argument.

What gave you the idea that I was making a scientific argument?

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

#178

Post by MikkoFinell »

xzttt wrote: post #105
MikkoFinell wrote: post #79

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So you were able to think of a couple confounding factors off the top of your head, but you dismiss the idea that the researchers had considered those factors and controlled for it? Despite the fact that their full time job it is to think about things like that, and their careers are on the line if they embarrass themselves by disregarding something as obvious and trivial like that? Did you even read the original pap…

I don't understand this researcher worship. How many papers from 1800-1900 are still valuable? How many from 1900-2000. Fact is that academia is grossly overstaffed and under publication pressure. Most papers aren't worth much, especially in the social sciences. Even in CS there are few seminal papers, and I mean the level of Tukey, Dana Scott, Pollard...

LOL, what are you talking about? I asked why OP had such a dismissive attitude towards the original paper, and that's "researcher worship"? Gotta be one of the most toxic responses I've gotten so far on HN.

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

#179

Post by reitanqild »

thegabez wrote: post #174
lkrubner wrote: post #154

About this: " This new paper found that among kids whose mothers had a college degree, those who waited for a second marshmallow did no better in the long run—in terms of standardized test scores and mothers’ reports of their children’s behavior—than those who dug right in. " Since "standardized test scores" tends to measure IQ, it seems this can be re-phrased as "those who did well on the will-power test did not nec…

Now that I think about it how is athleticism not considered a parameter of IQ? If you can learn to shoot a basketball 10x faster and with more accuracy than me, isn't your brain learning faster than mine?

Because IQ is a very specific thing.

It doesn't mean you know a lot or are good at high school maths.

IIRC an ideal IQ test would be something you could take even if you can't read and haven't learned maths and it will tell you something about your general problem solving skills.

And as we all know, people can be excellent problem solvers without being very athletic at all, so mixing that into the score would actually make it less useful.

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

#180

Post by MikkoFinell »

vanderZwan wrote: post #113
MikkoFinell wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The quote you copy-pasted from the article has nothing to do with my comment.

You complain to GP for not considering that the people who published the original Marshmallow test paper had controlled for confounding factors. In the opening paragraph, other researchers complain about just that. In other words: a more sensible reading of GP's comment would be as a reaction to said paragraph.

I asked why OP is dismissing the possibility that the authors considered the specific factors OP mentioned.

The quote you posted did not address that question. That is why it is not related to my comment, like I already said.

Post reply on HN