The Marshmallow Test: Acquiring Self Control and the Reality of Nature vs. Nurture

I recently told a co-worker that I was reading up on Walter Mischel’s Marshmallow test. One of the most well-known examples of social-science research, the test involves putting a child alone in a room with a treat of their choosing and a bell. The bell is to call the researcher back into the room. Ringing the bell will allow the child to eat the marshmallow. However, if the child waits for the researcher to come back into the room without ringing the bell, they will get two treats.

Follow up survey research with the children as they grew older indicated that there were benefits for those that displayed the self control and waited. An oft-cited one being SAT scores. When scores of children with the shortest delay times (bottom third) were compared with those of children with longer delay times (top third) the overall difference in scores was 210 points in favor of the kids able to wait the longest.

The benefits of goal setting, having plans for resisting temptation, and avoiding hyperbolic discounting (choosing a smaller-sooner reward over a larger-later reward), are undeniable. We detailed this in our article on the root causes of (and how to avoid) procrastination.

But my coworker’s response to hearing what the Marshmallow Test entailed hit on a point recent articles critical of the test have been making.

“What if the kid hasn’t eaten?”

The Importance of Environment: How Economic Stability, Trust, and Upbringing all Contribute to Success

So, “What if the kid hasn’t eaten?” A recent article in The Atlantic by Jessica McCrory Calarco is highly critical of the conclusions (or the inferences) of the Marshmallow Test. Calarco cites the research of Tyler Watts, Greg Duncan, and Hoanan Quan. The original Marshmallow Test used 90 preschool children conveniently located at the Stanford preschool. Watts, Duncan, and Quan restaged the test using 900 children (and a far more representative sample in terms of race, ethnicity, and parents’ education).

With this larger sample certain differences found within the original sample begin to level out. For example, “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.”  Parents’ education level and economic factors played a role in leveling out differences found in the original sample, as Calarco states for economically disadvantaged children, “daily life holds fewer guarantees: There might be food in the pantry today, but there might not be tomorrow, so there is a risk that comes with waiting. And even if their parents promise to buy more of a certain food, sometimes that promise gets broken out of financial necessity.”

The certainty of this article (and many like it) are examples of a general tendency to report scientific studies as “in conflict” with each other rather than expanding on, or adding to previous research.

In Walter Mischel’s book, The Marshmallow Test: Mastering Self-Control one of the first things he stresses is that this was never meant to be a test, the title was created and run with by the media. It was, rather, an experiment focused on when people develop the ability to plan in advance and also what “tools” work best for avoiding temptation. That this sample was not fully representative is accurate and uncontested (there were later attempts at adding to the economic diversity of the experiment). The difference in success markers is a postulation of what can be gained when (most things being equal) one is able to more successfully plan ahead.

Mischel cautions against the tendency to frame things in terms of nature vs. nurture. Our genetics are not our fate. How genes are expressed depends heavily on our environment. He details later research which found that children with fathers in the home did better in the experiments. This implies the importance of trust. Trust in adults. Trust that you will, indeed, get that second marshmallow. Such factors are not ignored by Mischel, the focus is just more on the tools people use to delay instant gratification for later rewards. And how those of us that struggle can do better.

Cooling Your Hot Head: The Limbic System and Tricks to Engage The Prefrontal Cortex

“I can resist anything except temptation”~Oscar Wilde

The limbic system is the more primitive part of the brain. The hot part. This is in contrast to the prefrontal cortex which developed later and puts the breaks on instant gratification in pursuit of higher goals. The prefrontal cortex is the cool.

So how did those kids resist temptation. And what methods changed the percentages of children able to? Researchers detailed the methods children did on their own, or were prompted to do.

Distraction was a popular method. In terms of adult goals an example might be replacing a bad habit with a good one. Like exercising or meditating whenever I feel the urge to smoke.

One of the most effective measures in resisting temptation is planning for it. This is called the if/then method. “If I am offered dessert at the party then I will politely decline and ask for coffee.

Belief that you can control outcomes is another important part of engaging the prefrontal cortex. This is what allows you to visualize your own success. An important part of looking ahead, beyond immediate desires.

Fast Company recently offered some unexpected advice when detailing Mischel’s research, including the relatively painless task of daydreaming. This might seem counterintuitive as we are often encouraged by society to be constantly busy. But when you’re caught up in all the little things, long term planning gets difficult. This isn’t to encourage task avoidance. The key in making daydreaming effective is allowing yourself, after a task that’s consumed a great deal of cognitive energy, to let your mind wander.

You’re Only Human

One point that should be made when discussing goal setting or long term planning is what happens when you give into temptation. A Forbes piece on developing self-discipline stresses the importance of recovering from mistakes, “Making mistakes is part of the process to becoming better. The way you recover from those mistakes is what’s most important. The key is to acknowledge your mistakes and move on from them with even more resolve to do better next time.”

You will probably stumble or, occasionally, walk right into the wrong choice. Plan for this too. And redouble your efforts when it occurs.

Behavioral psychologist Dan Ariely tells the story of an annual conference where behavioral and health scientists are discussing how to assist others to make healthier and better decisions. During the intermission most of them can’t resist but have the cookies set on the table.

As behavioural scientists, “despite our own efforts to live rational lives, we find ourselves choosing irrationally and failing like everyone else.” ~ Dan Ariely

Stay tuned for our next article expanding on this topic. Where we discuss being predictably irrational as humans.

---

---

Sources and Further Study

• The Marshmallow Test: Mastering Self-Control by Walter Mischel
• Why rich kids are so good at the marshmallow test
• Mastering the habit of delayed gratification
• 6 ways to develop the self-discipline
• You Are Not So Smart by David McRaney. Chapter 6: Procrastination