mental_floss magazine
SUBSCRIBE >
GIFT SUBSCRIPTIONS >
DIGITAL SUBSCRIPTIONS >
subscriber services >
In the late 1960s, researchers at Stanford devised what’s now known as the “marshmallow test” to test participants’ ability to defer gratification. The test went like this: put a marshmallow on the table in front of a four-year-old; tell the child that he or she can either eat the marshmallow now, or leave it uneaten for a while (15-20 minutes) and receive a second marshmallow at the end of the test; have the researcher leave the room for the prescribed period of time; if the child sits alone with the marshmallow for the test period and does not eat the treat, the researcher returns and gives the child two marshmallows to eat. This a test of delayed gratification — the ability for a person to put off the instant thrill of one marshmallow for the promise of two marshmallows down the road. What’s interesting is that the test is apparently predictive of future life success. If a four-year-old delays gratification (which is pretty rare), that kid will very likely grow up to be a very successful adult. Read on for more details.
A recent New Yorker article on the Stanford research is very compelling. (The research also involved treats other than marshmallows — including small toys and other treats — presumably to control for kids who just don’t like marshmallows.) Here’s a snippet (emphasis added):
Most of the children [struggled] to resist the treat and held out for an average of less than three minutes. “A few kids ate the marshmallow right away,” Walter Mischel, the Stanford professor of psychology in charge of the experiment, remembers. “They didn’t even bother ringing the bell. Other kids would stare directly at the marshmallow and then ring the bell thirty seconds later.” About thirty per cent of the children, however, were like Carolyn. They successfully delayed gratification until the researcher returned, some fifteen minutes later. These kids wrestled with temptation but found a way to resist.
… Once Mischel began analyzing the results, he noticed that low delayers, the children who rang the bell quickly, seemed more likely to have behavioral problems, both in school and at home. They got lower S.A.T. scores. They struggled in stressful situations, often had trouble paying attention, and found it difficult to maintain friendships. The child who could wait fifteen minutes had an S.A.T. score that was, on average, two hundred and ten points higher than that of the kid who could wait only thirty seconds.
Wow. Read the rest to learn more about this research, how it came about, and what it might mean about you. (Also, I dare you to try this with your own kids!) After the jump, a related TED Talk and some more links on how to conduct your own marshmallow test.
Here’s a brief TED Talk about the marshmallow experiment by Joachim de Posada — including some goofy video of actual kids taking the test:
See also: how to administer the marshmallow experiment, and Wikipedia on deferred gratification. (Marshmallow image from Wikipedia, used under Creative Commons license.)
Comments (13)
Comment
- Follow mental_floss
I could have held out forever, I hate marshmallows. This study doesn’t seem to acknowledge that marshmallows are gross.
posted by K on 5-28-2009 at 4:42 pm
What about kids who just don’t care for marshmallows?
posted by RobertSeattle on 5-28-2009 at 4:44 pm
Just finished reading the actual article. Going to try that out on my nephews..
BTW ROBERTSeattle, the kids got a choice of treat. Pretzel, Marshmellow or I forget the 3rd option.
I’d like to think I would have made the 15min mainly since I’m stubborn but who knows at that age…..
posted by dbus on 5-28-2009 at 4:54 pm
Dudes, read the article before commenting. I’m not talking the article linked to — I mean the actual thing you’re responding to.
“The research also involved treats other than marshmallows — including small toys and other treats — presumably to control for kids who just don’t like marshmallows.”
Having ADD, I’d probably have scored very poorly on the test. I also had a very high SAT. So be VERY cautious of applying this research to individuals. While probably broadly true across a large section of the populace, you will find enough people who don’t fit it that it would be foolish to use it to predict an individual person’s success in life.
Or, to put it another way, just because your kid grabbed the marshmallow doesn’t mean he’s going to be a low-achiever or a sociopath.
posted by Calli Arcale on 5-28-2009 at 4:57 pm
K and Robert wouldn’t get the second treat.
posted by Leah on 5-28-2009 at 5:35 pm
What does reading this while at work say about my ability to defer gratification?
posted by Bryan on 5-28-2009 at 6:32 pm
Funny, I was *just* talking to someone about this test. One of the things I remember is, that the kids who could delay gratification were successful regardless of IQ – and that this was seen as evidence of emotional intelligence.
posted by swss on 5-28-2009 at 8:38 pm
I would eat my marshmallow and then flip the table and go, breaking down doors/any obstacles in my path, in search of more rooms with tables and marshmallows and kids wringing their hands.
posted by AMR on 5-28-2009 at 11:42 pm
I am a child psychologist. I used to do the ADD test. I had a piece of candy just sitting on the corner of my desk. The kids who took the candy and vs the the kids who would ask. Bonus kids: The ones who asked if they could have it after it was in their mouth. I called them ADD.
posted by drHoward on 5-29-2009 at 12:27 am
Does it have to be food? What if it were done with a different kind of reward, say a trip to a pool, or a more lasting prize? I mean, I know I would have eaten the marshmallow if the only result of not eating it would be another marshmallow (which actually wouldn’t have worked, as I wouldn’t eat them as a kid, but I digress). But if I had been promised something better than just more candy I would have held out. What does that say about me?
posted by Abena on 5-29-2009 at 2:04 am
@Abena – they did have variants of the test with small toys and other stuff a kid might like; this is mentioned briefly in the source article. But I believe the rewards were all objects, rather than experiences or other such abstract rewards.
posted by Chris Higgins on 5-29-2009 at 6:51 pm
@ AMR — LMAO…priceless response :)
posted by Brandy on 6-1-2009 at 6:29 pm
i’m surprised that they allowed the study videos to be placed online; i know with my own psychology experiments the privacy laws are very restrictive as to who is allowed to view the videotapes…especially with minors involved.
interesting study however; in my research we refer to delayed gratification as ‘telic hedonism’
posted by nick on 6-8-2009 at 7:26 pm