The thing that stood out to me was, "The children that resisted focused on other happy thoughts." Which makes me consider also like, what if the subject has weak, poor, or few to no happy thoughts to retreat to so to hold themselves over? Does that correlate closely to those in debt often having depression and trauma in their histories?
Definitely. When it all comes down it becomes crystal clear how important is this something 'to retreat to'. It's closely entwined with 'faith' in it's real meaning - not to confuse with religious - as an ultimate motivator for anyone.
For The Wynne This also correlates with how much the child trusts that the researcher will actually give them a second treat and not take away the one they’ve already got in front of them.
For The Wynne Yes. That’s pretty much exactly what she said - “the home’s sociological status, wealth, education, and an environment where the child gets lots of attention.” In other words, a child with a good (happy) home life will be more successful.
I think there was a really important misunderstanding... the kid that has always had everything they wanted, they don't really care if they get the first marshmallow. If the kid has always been lied to, or didn't always have much, their desire to take anything they can get as soon as they get it is amplified. This environment is also highly linked to their family income. I don't know how researchers missed that to begin with... I guess psychology is a lot more scientific a topic of study now than it was back then.
"guess psychology is a lot more scientific a topic of study now than it was" It's still quite lacking, look up the replication crisis. It's hard to study humans, we're a much more complex system than other fields are trying to to study
@@Darth_Pro_x Yeah I heard about that. It's a social science at the end of the day. It's really hard to replicate/control factors unless you throw human rights and ethics out the door. At least now it's taught with intent to be more scientific than it used to be. When I took courses for my neuroscience minor, we were required to take a course in social science experimentation methodology, which included stuff like survey methods and experimental biases, correlation and causation etc. Probably one of the more useful courses I ever took.
You can't factor for socioeconomic status......think about it if you are looking at how delayed gratification effects your education and socioeconomic status is a cause of lower levels of delayed gratification then you can't just write it off. Secondly "factoring" for socioeconomic status is one big black box. No one ever justifies the "factoring" that is done.
@@spartacusthebringerofrain6455 what do you mean? It is a confounding factor. You're supposed to do a correlation analysis on possible confounding factors to rule it out as the real link between the result and the cause.
"If you wait we'll give you a second marshmallow!" Child me: Ha ha yeah right, this has to be a trick. I'm eating the marshmallow I KNOW I can have rather than wait for two that I might not be able to have.
Being in an environment where you have to hold on to everything you have to make it reduces the feasibility of taking chances. Can I gamble some resources on a venture to get more? Or will that wager cost me my income, home, and family?
So glad you pointed out the trust aspect! I always thought the test was much more about testing how much a kid trusted a total stranger to keep his word. A better test would be to have a second treat visible in a locked box that the child understands will *definitely* unlock after 15 minutes, so the trust element can be taken out of it. The first time I read about this test my conclusion was that kids raised in unstable, unpredictable families would quickly seize an opportunity as soon as it was presented (lest it go away) and kids raised in stable, predictable families where there was trust that future events would unfold as explained would be able to trust that it was “safe” to wait. In other words, the test didn’t look at willpower so much as it looked at the child’s judgement on how likely they would be to actually get a second treat if they waited. Imagine a child raised in a family where an older sibling might come in to the room, take the treat by force, leave, and then the adult returns, sees the treat gone, and says “oh, you didn’t wait, you don’t get the second treat.” If the child thinks this scenario is plausible then they would be making the completely rational choice to at least get one treat, rather than none at all.
Except those who "don't like" it in the sense that for them just one is more than enough, so they don't bother waiting for two. Those will grow up to be losers, compared to those who like it a bit more and can stand the wait, or those who like it too much and can't stand. But those who like it so much that they force themselves to wait also do fine.
Nope, this is revisionist leftist anti-science. Notice that they did mention there's still a correlation with SAT scores. Call it what you will: will power, self control, self restraint.. it's still a character defining quality that has a positive correlation with success. They're downplaying it like they do with IQ scores because it makes leftists feel bad.
I always hated learning about the marshmallow test. It made me feel guilty because I struggle patience and self control. After being diagnosed with ADHD it makes sense, I don't get that pang of guilt anymore, but it still makes me angry how this test made me feel like I wouldn't succeed later in life. Hearing that me that made me less willing to stay in school honestly. Also how many of those kids actually liked marshmallows? I've always felt neutrally towards them. But if it were a cookie or a chocolate bar I'd have a lot harder time.
It sounds more like "Kids that got better education at home (and probably at school) and reacted with better behavior had more academic success". So it's waaaaay more about class than anything else
@@tbird-z1r If poor people didn't have children, then you wouldn't be alive, everyone in the world has poor ancestors. Even if you're the child of a millionaire/billionaire, then either your grandparents were poor or your great-grandparents, etc...
@@tbird-z1r Additionally, the better off *everyone* is in the world, the better their education, the better their healthcare, the better their access to career upward mobility, etc... the scientific evidence clearly shows that they end up having *LESS* *CHILDREN* so the birthrate slows down and overpopulation isn't a problem. Even if you're an independently wealthy person who owns a huge corporation or inherited millions, it's in your best interest financially to help out the poor and middle classes of whatever society you live in, as a more financially stable and better educated working class population with better access to healthcare, jobs, and fair justice systems means they will have more money to spend and have far less crippling debt, therefore the economy of your nation improves and the upper classes end up making *more* money over the long-term while living in a *safer* and more stable society.
No, it's not more about class than it is more about the fact that marshmallows aren't actually good at all and many people are allergic to them since they are 100% corn and corn is one of the most common allergies
When I was 4 I would have waited, not because there was another marshmallow but because I would have wanted to respect the authority figure by waiting.
I won't even put Lucky Charms in the house anymore because of my kids. My daughter will only eat the marshmallows and dump the cereal back into the box. So when my son and I go to get a bowl of cereal we end up seriously disappointed.
@@nobodyspecial3123 i think what really is going on is a cerial disappointment!! dum dum tssss!! @ Christel Headington try eating 3brown - one blue!! thank me later!!!
There are some studies, I think, where kids were told ‘I’ll come back with something better later’ three times, and in one group, the experimenter failed to deliver on the first two promises - so in round three, those kids ate the marshmallow when they had the chance. So the original marshmallow test might partly have been testing how reliable those kids experienced adults as being; it’s hardly surprising that kids surrounded by dependable adults would do better in life!
Interesting stuff! Thanks for talking about it. Re 4:21, thanks for talking about ways to practice (and/or reduce the need for) self-control, as well... I'd love a deeper dive on that sometime, if that's a reasonable thing to do.
Yeah, I've always been skeptical of this study. Like, how does a kid wanting a marshmallow affect things like SAT scores? What did they define as a construct for self-control and willpower, and HOW did the study measure successfully measure that? I had far more questions after reading the study that it just did not answer about its own conclusions
To be fair no research study is designed to answer every possible question one could have on a topic, that's not the point. The study found exactly what it was meant to... a relationship that other studies could jump off from.
@@BlckSWANWhtRbbt exactly, and it did find a correlation as it claims. What intrigues me is the follow up study, looked for other factors, but did not consider genetics as being a factor at play parallel to socioeconomic status and home environment.
It was thought kids able to delay eating the marshmallow for a bigger reward would tend to have a more general ability in delaying gratification, so they'd do things like not partying/partying less when they need to study, hence higher SAT scores.
@@tinagrzeczkowski695 that genetics will affect variation in anything is something that doesn't need to be mentioned. It's not like studies not mentioning genetics have really assumed they've "ruled out" any role of genetic variation. It's just that studies need to be specifically designed to assess genetic factors, and this design is more complex, it's a more onerous hypothesis to pin-point genes or a vague genetic factor. So genetics can be kind of ignored as "noise" when this is not the focus of the study (which is something that doesn't seem to be strongly affected by genetics, like a disease would be). You can even get the appearance of an "inheritance" effect of the alleles the children _didn't inherit from the parents._ Which some would argue are still effects of the genetic phenotype of the parents raising them. But then it's kind of moot to say it's "genetics" if the children didn't really inherit these genes specifically, it's the "genetics of the social/domestic environment", so just say it's "environment", "upbringing", and don't make a more onerous claim you can't back up with the necessary evidence.
I had never even heard of this test. I thought this video was going to be about trying to stuff as many marshmallows in your mouth at one time and still be able to say a phrase... Apparently, we had very different childhoods.
I don't agree with "Good Vibes Only" I think it's important to let people express negative feelings too and let them feel accepted. Otherwise it leads to repression.
When I learned about this in college, my understanding was that maturity was the ultimate factor in if they waited or not for the additional reward. But with this, not sure now.
I think my mom once tried this one with me i but with a piece of chocolate saying i could have the rest of the bar if i waited the next day i asked her how much longer i had to wait only to find out she had forgot and eaten the rest of the chocolate
3:36 Why I don't believe in religion despite everyone in my family forcing me to pray or go to church -_-. Not that I don't trust them. I just don't trust 2,000 year old prophecies that have yet to come true despite the tiring amount of times people thought they would :P
It makes sense if it would measure privlage.Can you imagine how a hungry child with negative parents who take the sweet things in life away from them would fare against well fed children who's parents fill them with the happy thoughts to last and saturate them with literal and metaphorical sweetness?
One interesting factor of this experiment is what kids did while they were waiting. Some kids played with the Marshmallow, some covered their eyes. This is important because when we often abstain from activities we believe are harmful. However as the video pointed out is that waiting may not be a result of more self control but other factors such as imagination.
My niece was part of a bunch of early learning experiments when she was little. They used a cool toy instead of a marshmallow. She failed because she cried about being left alone, but didn't touch the toy.
I think the mechanism are less important in the marshmallow test than its predictive and diagnostic power. Children who fail the marshmallow test might be symptomatic of deeper problems in the home environment, and helping the family might be a good intervention.
@@ginnyjollykidd The marshmallow test can be a diagnostic tools to see who needs those resources. Some children need more help than others, and knowing where to invest resources allows us to use them more effectively.
You think the mechanisms are less important 100% because you are not allergic to corn. Of COURSE you don't think the fact that they used a common allergen is important. Children who "fail" the toxic allergen test might actually just be allergic to toxic allergens?
@@detectivewiggles If they eat the marshmallow before the 5 minutes are up, then they "fail" the test. If the child is allergic to marshmallows because they are allergic to the corn syrup in them, they either wouldn't eat the marshmallow (because they know it will make them sick), or their parents won't put them in the test, or another desirable food will be used (like an organic, nut free, dairy free, gluten free brownie). In either case, a child who is allergic to marshmallows would likely pass the test, and it would be sign that the child can understand "I shouldn't eat this," or it could mean that the parents taught the child "ask if the food has corn in it," and the child complies. In either case, the mechanism is less important than the predictive power of the test (the mechanism could be parental attentiveness, the child's intelligence, the child having access to adequate health care, etc.).
I would also argue metacognition or weighing out whether a marshmallow is worth 10 minutes of "torture" over a marshmallow. Personally, I would have spent the 10 minutes slowly playing with the marshmallow. Eating it slowly as my only source of entertainment
I saw a post saying that this test was faulty because it completely ignores the homelife of a child. That being if a kid has the ability to get what they need and want, and their parents had money, so they had no reason to suspect they wouldnt get a marshmallow, while a poor kid whose parebts struggled would most likely eat the marshmallow quickly as they were used to scarfing down food in case more wasn't available later. I think this video sums it up pretty well.
My friend was a substitute teacher for a while and one day- in a school know for its high population of kids from low - income, poor - home life families- asked the students to write down what they want to do when they grow up. She was quite heartbroken to see that one student wanted to go to jail. That isn't going to be helped by any self - control test.
Wow, never heard of this test before, and I'm kind of glad. Having had a decidedly NOT wealthy or stable childhood environment...I probably wouldn't have waited. I wonder how much psychology has studied the various effects of poverty on kids? Not like "are they more depressed" but things like eating habits or financial ones. If you go hungry a lot as a kid, does that mean you'll be better at controlling diet later on in life, or not? If you never had a lot of money, does that somehow make you incapable of saving up money when you grow up? (Or if not incapable, it's a LOT harder to stick to a budget and so on)
I just pictured my five year old self being given infinitely doubling marshmallows on 15 minute intervals, begging for it to stop. "Please, no, I don't want them! They're gross!"
The psychologist who famously did this research wrote a book by the same name (and comes in audiobook form). He goes into detail on what his research is useful for. The emphasis is less on "willpower" and more on using techniques for avoiding temptation. These can be learned and practiced.
At 4:05 you say: "The effect all but disappeared" But doesn't that mean that it didn't disappear at all? All but -> Everything except So: It did everything, except disappear. So it didn't disappear? Sorry, I'm not a native English speaker, maybe that's just a saying?
It's a figure of speech/saying, generally used to mean "almost entirely/completely" or something similar to that effect. So "when accounting for x, y was reduced to the point of nonimportance". that's where the all *but* comes from, all disappeared *but* a little (if anything). Hopefully that makes sense? ^^"
@@MetsuryuVids that's fair. having heard it all my life it never struck me that way, but thinking on the literal meaning you're right, it is a bit odd of a phrase.
"No one waits around for some hypothetical reward that they don't believe it's actually coming" isn't that religion in a nutshell? *Runs Away from Comments*
Well, religious people actually do believe the hypothetical reward is coming. That's more the reason why some people raised in religious households eventually become atheists or agnostics.
@@TheChocoXCheese "Well, religious people actually do believe the hypothetical reward is coming" Like myself? So, mind-reader - how many fingers am I thinking about? "some people raised in religious households eventually become atheists or agnostics" Which is really just a lazy _non sequitur_ way to address the topic rather than analyzing the subtleties of the socioeconomical variables involved; but most people enjoy their _non sequitur_ lives for their own sake, and if I try to think otherwise, that's on me...
@@thstroyur Are you claiming that religious people /don't/ have faith? Because all I said was that religious people believe in something unproven, and those who leave religion don't believe. No judgement either way.
@@TheChocoXCheese I dunno - are you claiming that religious creed reduces to 'be nice so you get your hypothetical (scientifically "unproven") reward'? "I said was that religious people believe in something unproven" - plus "some people raised in religious households eventually become atheists or agnostics", i.e. sociology. But then again, I guess someone misses the point of "belief" here - everything that's true gotta be proven, huh? So how do you prove the statement that everything that's true gotta be proven? Thru the power of lazy thinking, I suppose...
4:50 change your environment so you don't have to exert willpower. "Doctor, doctor! It hurts when I do this!" "Well don't DO that!" Is it reasonable to tell a patient with no home support or means to stay off their broken ankles?
They tried to do this test to me in Health class except I literally did not listen at all so instead of having no self control I just had obliviousness
Is it presumed that every child WANTS a second marshmallow? Is sugar an undeniable commodity to every four year old? Or did some kids just think that waiting for the second marshmallow was the more desirable behavior, and decided to hold out to gain an inferred 'social chip'?
I could have figured out that some of the kids who waited for the second marshmallow weren't really struggling. Because of that impulse thing. I saw a blog about a woman who said she felt like she was hitting a wall whenever she took a jog that took her by a donut shop. I'm like seriously? Really? Willpower isn't even a thing when you don't have that problem in the first place.
I've watched a few videos on this experiment, and the thing I noticed is the kids sit in front of the marshmallow, staring at it, not leaving their seat to find something to get their mind off the deal. Yeah, if I was forced to just sit in front of a Big Mac and stare at it, it would be gone in a heartbeat, but if I had access to a TV, or books, or a computer, or a sibling, or chores to do, I could probably take my mind off of it. I don't think anyone believes the Marshmallow Experiment is a panacea, but I think it might be a good place to start, just to see where your kid is at before you start him on counseling.
It be interesting to know how the kids that couldn't abstain eating that marshmallow faired later in life. They never mention that. I've only heard about how great the abstaining kids were doing.
I've kind of always known that there's a difference between a strong feeling held back and a weak feeling, despite them outwardly appearing the same...
"Okay children, you can eat the marshmallow now..." *kid instantly gobbles down*"... or you can wait and have 3 later..." Kid: "but how is that fair, I don't have a marshmallow to wait for." Researcher realise test stupid and hands out the rest of marshmallows amongst the kids.
This measures value judgements, not willpower. One might not want two marshmallows and might just want one. Or one might value a single marshmallow now more than two marshmallows in 15 minutes. What if you were offered one marshmallow now, or two marshmallows in ten years? Almost everyone would choose one marshmallow now. This is a measure of value judgement (economics) not willpower.
Can I be that guy and say that we shouldn't say "wealth" is part of a metric that may contribute to such factors? With the college entrance scandal and all kind of making a point that wealth does not always have such an affect. May be more accurate to assume better "resources"; money, access to opportunities, parenting strategies, etc.
When I'm fasting, not having food available does wonders. Also, I imagine myself eating, with exquisite detail, what I'm tempted to eat at the moment. This tricks the brain somehow and lowers the craving to make it tolerable (I got the idea from a research about this). In the Devil's Advocate the say that God tells you to: "Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow". This is it. There are layers of temptation and every following layer is harder to resist. Do you want to win over it? Don't look at it or even think of it. Change your "mind subject" as soon as you see the idea popping up (like if you where meditating).
Relativity...if only researchers knew and kept within their order of motions the Full implications of the word Relativity, Einstein would be a very much happy man to see just how much more farther his original idea gets beyond that of what he first realized for it when he made cases around it. But you getting closer.
Have you ever read about or listened to what the professor that contacted the original experiment says? They strongly believe that will power is something that can be learned.
It's like how I don't take my money with me when I go places so that I can't impulse buy something. When I do have money, it's because I have a specific item I want which also means I won't impulse buy. Amazon is evil.
Yeah my mom makes fun of me for that. If I dont intend to buy stuff I dont bring any money. Then she impulsively goes to a store and chastises me for not having chip-ins
I don't understand. Whatever you explained was what anyone would deduce from that expt. There were people who actually thought training kids with marsmallows would change their will power?
It's a standarized test in the US that students usually take in senior high. It's gotten better over the years, but many flawed studies done on test results have led to some pretty awful stereotypes separating along socioethnic lines. It's short for Scholastic Assessment Test, but I prefer the mneumonic "Shut your Ass and Take it".
The thing that stood out to me was, "The children that resisted focused on other happy thoughts." Which makes me consider also like, what if the subject has weak, poor, or few to no happy thoughts to retreat to so to hold themselves over? Does that correlate closely to those in debt often having depression and trauma in their histories?
Definitely. When it all comes down it becomes crystal clear how important is this something 'to retreat to'. It's closely entwined with 'faith' in it's real meaning - not to confuse with religious - as an ultimate motivator for anyone.
For The Wynne
This also correlates with how much the child trusts that the researcher will actually give them a second treat and not take away the one they’ve already got in front of them.
gambling and other forms of addiction are related to this too
Debt is stressful so of course it's related to depression. That has nothing to do with "not having happy thoughts".
For The Wynne Yes. That’s pretty much exactly what she said - “the home’s sociological status, wealth, education, and an environment where the child gets lots of attention.” In other words, a child with a good (happy) home life will be more successful.
"But one thing you can control is whether you catch every episode of SciShow Psych"
TH-cam: "Hold my beer"
Researcher: Okay, you can have one marshmallow now or wait fif--
Me: *through a mouthful of marshmallow* Pardon?
I think there was a really important misunderstanding... the kid that has always had everything they wanted, they don't really care if they get the first marshmallow. If the kid has always been lied to, or didn't always have much, their desire to take anything they can get as soon as they get it is amplified. This environment is also highly linked to their family income. I don't know how researchers missed that to begin with... I guess psychology is a lot more scientific a topic of study now than it was back then.
"guess psychology is a lot more scientific a topic of study now than it was"
It's still quite lacking, look up the replication crisis.
It's hard to study humans, we're a much more complex system than other fields are trying to to study
@@Darth_Pro_x Yeah I heard about that. It's a social science at the end of the day. It's really hard to replicate/control factors unless you throw human rights and ethics out the door.
At least now it's taught with intent to be more scientific than it used to be. When I took courses for my neuroscience minor, we were required to take a course in social science experimentation methodology, which included stuff like survey methods and experimental biases, correlation and causation etc. Probably one of the more useful courses I ever took.
@@rei_cirith Sounds awesome :)
You can't factor for socioeconomic status......think about it if you are looking at how delayed gratification effects your education and socioeconomic status is a cause of lower levels of delayed gratification then you can't just write it off. Secondly "factoring" for socioeconomic status is one big black box. No one ever justifies the "factoring" that is done.
@@spartacusthebringerofrain6455 what do you mean? It is a confounding factor. You're supposed to do a correlation analysis on possible confounding factors to rule it out as the real link between the result and the cause.
"If you wait we'll give you a second marshmallow!"
Child me: Ha ha yeah right, this has to be a trick. I'm eating the marshmallow I KNOW I can have rather than wait for two that I might not be able to have.
Being in an environment where you have to hold on to everything you have to make it reduces the feasibility of taking chances.
Can I gamble some resources on a venture to get more? Or will that wager cost me my income, home, and family?
Right? Yesterday Mom told me we were going to McDonalds if I cleaned my room. Pff.
Holy childhood trauma, batman!
So glad you pointed out the trust aspect! I always thought the test was much more about testing how much a kid trusted a total stranger to keep his word. A better test would be to have a second treat visible in a locked box that the child understands will *definitely* unlock after 15 minutes, so the trust element can be taken out of it.
The first time I read about this test my conclusion was that kids raised in unstable, unpredictable families would quickly seize an opportunity as soon as it was presented (lest it go away) and kids raised in stable, predictable families where there was trust that future events would unfold as explained would be able to trust that it was “safe” to wait. In other words, the test didn’t look at willpower so much as it looked at the child’s judgement on how likely they would be to actually get a second treat if they waited. Imagine a child raised in a family where an older sibling might come in to the room, take the treat by force, leave, and then the adult returns, sees the treat gone, and says “oh, you didn’t wait, you don’t get the second treat.” If the child thinks this scenario is plausible then they would be making the completely rational choice to at least get one treat, rather than none at all.
this just in: kids who don't like marshmallows more successful in life!
Except those who "don't like" it in the sense that for them just one is more than enough, so they don't bother waiting for two. Those will grow up to be losers, compared to those who like it a bit more and can stand the wait, or those who like it too much and can't stand. But those who like it so much that they force themselves to wait also do fine.
Yeah, I don't like raw marshmallows, they have to be toasted over fire if you ask me
Or waiting for a marshmallow is more indicitive of parents success than kids 😊
@@petitio_principii How about the kids who say F it and leave the room, for something they care more about than a stupid sugar sponge.
It's almost as if humans are complex creatures.
Yet appearances can be deceiving
@@thstroyur yes, take stick figures for example, that 2d facade hides the intricacies within
Nope, this is revisionist leftist anti-science. Notice that they did mention there's still a correlation with SAT scores. Call it what you will: will power, self control, self restraint.. it's still a character defining quality that has a positive correlation with success. They're downplaying it like they do with IQ scores because it makes leftists feel bad.
@@eclipse5393 that's not what they're saying...
@@carissstewart3211 They want to make it all about environment. It's the same as the blank slate lie.
I didn’t have the willpower to not watch this video and go to sleep
Same
I always hated learning about the marshmallow test. It made me feel guilty because I struggle patience and self control. After being diagnosed with ADHD it makes sense, I don't get that pang of guilt anymore, but it still makes me angry how this test made me feel like I wouldn't succeed later in life. Hearing that me that made me less willing to stay in school honestly.
Also how many of those kids actually liked marshmallows? I've always felt neutrally towards them. But if it were a cookie or a chocolate bar I'd have a lot harder time.
Other snacks were available for the children to choose. The marshmallow was just the iconic snack.
I have ADHD too
Well, let's see where you are at age 30
Love your Hilda avatar by the way
Same haha I thought I was inherently flawed and destined for failure lol
It sounds more like "Kids that got better education at home (and probably at school) and reacted with better behavior had more academic success".
So it's waaaaay more about class than anything else
"it's waaaaay more about [socioeconomic] class than anything else"
@@tbird-z1r If poor people didn't have children, then you wouldn't be alive, everyone in the world has poor ancestors. Even if you're the child of a millionaire/billionaire, then either your grandparents were poor or your great-grandparents, etc...
@@tbird-z1r Additionally, the better off *everyone* is in the world, the better their education, the better their healthcare, the better their access to career upward mobility, etc... the scientific evidence clearly shows that they end up having *LESS* *CHILDREN* so the birthrate slows down and overpopulation isn't a problem.
Even if you're an independently wealthy person who owns a huge corporation or inherited millions, it's in your best interest financially to help out the poor and middle classes of whatever society you live in, as a more financially stable and better educated working class population with better access to healthcare, jobs, and fair justice systems means they will have more money to spend and have far less crippling debt, therefore the economy of your nation improves and the upper classes end up making *more* money over the long-term while living in a *safer* and more stable society.
No, it's not more about class than it is more about the fact that marshmallows aren't actually good at all and many people are allergic to them since they are 100% corn and corn is one of the most common allergies
income affects so much about how someone grows. thank you for correcting the record on this
When I was 4 I would have waited, not because there was another marshmallow but because I would have wanted to respect the authority figure by waiting.
I passed the marshmellow test when i was 4 with my mom
I secretly stole some from the pantry.
Yeah, well.. my 7 year old still can't seem to stop herself from picking out all the marshmallows from the Lucky Charms box.
I have the same problem with the 40 years old in my house...oh right that’s me
@@stnickwoods -I eat M&M's one color at time...like first the brown,then the yellows...
First mistake is letting Lucky Charms get into your house!
I won't even put Lucky Charms in the house anymore because of my kids. My daughter will only eat the marshmallows and dump the cereal back into the box. So when my son and I go to get a bowl of cereal we end up seriously disappointed.
@@nobodyspecial3123 i think what really is going on is a cerial disappointment!!
dum dum tssss!!
@ Christel Headington
try eating 3brown - one blue!!
thank me later!!!
Meanwhile I have the opposite problem.
With weak impulses and weak reward responses, I struggle to motivate myself to do the things I want to do.
I think we need s'more tests
Take your like, get out of here and think about what you've done.
Ah, if only I had the willpower, to do exercises that would improve my willpower...🥴
It's all an inescapable cycle...
The best thing to improve Will Power is to give him a better car.
This is one of the best channels on TH-cam.
There are some studies, I think, where kids were told ‘I’ll come back with something better later’ three times, and in one group, the experimenter failed to deliver on the first two promises - so in round three, those kids ate the marshmallow when they had the chance. So the original marshmallow test might partly have been testing how reliable those kids experienced adults as being; it’s hardly surprising that kids surrounded by dependable adults would do better in life!
Wow... I've never heard of this before. I got a little confused when I saw the thumbnail, but this was a really interesting video! :)
5:00 That's how I beat procrastination. I have 1 computer set up for work and another set up for internet browsing.
Interesting stuff! Thanks for talking about it.
Re 4:21, thanks for talking about ways to practice (and/or reduce the need for) self-control, as well... I'd love a deeper dive on that sometime, if that's a reasonable thing to do.
Walter Mischel, the psychologist who led the research, wrote a book by the same name: The Marshmallow Test.
Yeah, I've always been skeptical of this study. Like, how does a kid wanting a marshmallow affect things like SAT scores? What did they define as a construct for self-control and willpower, and HOW did the study measure successfully measure that? I had far more questions after reading the study that it just did not answer about its own conclusions
Huzzah for actually reading the study! :)
To be fair no research study is designed to answer every possible question one could have on a topic, that's not the point. The study found exactly what it was meant to... a relationship that other studies could jump off from.
@@BlckSWANWhtRbbt exactly, and it did find a correlation as it claims. What intrigues me is the follow up study, looked for other factors, but did not consider genetics as being a factor at play parallel to socioeconomic status and home environment.
It was thought kids able to delay eating the marshmallow for a bigger reward would tend to have a more general ability in delaying gratification, so they'd do things like not partying/partying less when they need to study, hence higher SAT scores.
@@tinagrzeczkowski695 that genetics will affect variation in anything is something that doesn't need to be mentioned. It's not like studies not mentioning genetics have really assumed they've "ruled out" any role of genetic variation. It's just that studies need to be specifically designed to assess genetic factors, and this design is more complex, it's a more onerous hypothesis to pin-point genes or a vague genetic factor. So genetics can be kind of ignored as "noise" when this is not the focus of the study (which is something that doesn't seem to be strongly affected by genetics, like a disease would be).
You can even get the appearance of an "inheritance" effect of the alleles the children _didn't inherit from the parents._ Which some would argue are still effects of the genetic phenotype of the parents raising them. But then it's kind of moot to say it's "genetics" if the children didn't really inherit these genes specifically, it's the "genetics of the social/domestic environment", so just say it's "environment", "upbringing", and don't make a more onerous claim you can't back up with the necessary evidence.
I have left a comment. May your analytics reflect that.
@@ericolens3 yes fellow human, what an exchange of information we have made! Let us go about our day and soon forget it ever happened.
isn't it youtube's analytics?
@@ericolens3 I would watch that.
@@ericolens3 lol
I had never even heard of this test. I thought this video was going to be about trying to stuff as many marshmallows in your mouth at one time and still be able to say a phrase... Apparently, we had very different childhoods.
I don't agree with "Good Vibes Only" I think it's important to let people express negative feelings too and let them feel accepted. Otherwise it leads to repression.
If you mention Tom Hiddleston, you must show us Tom Hiddleston. Those are the rules.
You know how the saying goes: “A marshmallow in the hand is worth two in the bush”
Reminds me if another saying: "It is highly inadvisable to eat marshmallows found in a bush."
I never wasted any energy resisting temptation.
That’s GOOD😊
When I learned about this in college, my understanding was that maturity was the ultimate factor in if they waited or not for the additional reward. But with this, not sure now.
When my daughter was offered three lollies if she waited 15 mins. She asked if she could have ,12 after an hour. She has a math PhD from Oxford now.
Please do a video on temporal motivation theory! it's fascinating! (or in it's popular name "the procrastination equation")
I think my mom once tried this one with me i but with a piece of chocolate saying i could have the rest of the bar if i waited the next day i asked her how much longer i had to wait only to find out she had forgot and eaten the rest of the chocolate
3:36 Why I don't believe in religion despite everyone in my family forcing me to pray or go to church -_-. Not that I don't trust them. I just don't trust 2,000 year old prophecies that have yet to come true despite the tiring amount of times people thought they would :P
It makes sense if it would measure privlage.Can you imagine how a hungry child with negative parents who take the sweet things in life away from them would fare against well fed children who's parents fill them with the happy thoughts to last and saturate them with literal and metaphorical sweetness?
One interesting factor of this experiment is what kids did while they were waiting. Some kids played with the Marshmallow, some covered their eyes. This is important because when we often abstain from activities we believe are harmful.
However as the video pointed out is that waiting may not be a result of more self control but other factors such as imagination.
My niece was part of a bunch of early learning experiments when she was little. They used a cool toy instead of a marshmallow. She failed because she cried about being left alone, but didn't touch the toy.
I have plenty if Will Power. What I don't have is Won't Power...
Willn't power
So just will you into doing something that incidentally won't be doing something else.
I think the mechanism are less important in the marshmallow test than its predictive and diagnostic power. Children who fail the marshmallow test might be symptomatic of deeper problems in the home environment, and helping the family might be a good intervention.
In other words giving all children what they need to succeed.
@@ginnyjollykidd The marshmallow test can be a diagnostic tools to see who needs those resources. Some children need more help than others, and knowing where to invest resources allows us to use them more effectively.
Thats an interesting take on it
You think the mechanisms are less important 100% because you are not allergic to corn. Of COURSE you don't think the fact that they used a common allergen is important. Children who "fail" the toxic allergen test might actually just be allergic to toxic allergens?
@@detectivewiggles If they eat the marshmallow before the 5 minutes are up, then they "fail" the test. If the child is allergic to marshmallows because they are allergic to the corn syrup in them, they either wouldn't eat the marshmallow (because they know it will make them sick), or their parents won't put them in the test, or another desirable food will be used (like an organic, nut free, dairy free, gluten free brownie).
In either case, a child who is allergic to marshmallows would likely pass the test, and it would be sign that the child can understand "I shouldn't eat this," or it could mean that the parents taught the child "ask if the food has corn in it," and the child complies. In either case, the mechanism is less important than the predictive power of the test (the mechanism could be parental attentiveness, the child's intelligence, the child having access to adequate health care, etc.).
I would also argue metacognition or weighing out whether a marshmallow is worth 10 minutes of "torture" over a marshmallow. Personally, I would have spent the 10 minutes slowly playing with the marshmallow. Eating it slowly as my only source of entertainment
I saw a post saying that this test was faulty because it completely ignores the homelife of a child. That being if a kid has the ability to get what they need and want, and their parents had money, so they had no reason to suspect they wouldnt get a marshmallow, while a poor kid whose parebts struggled would most likely eat the marshmallow quickly as they were used to scarfing down food in case more wasn't available later. I think this video sums it up pretty well.
My friend was a substitute teacher for a while and one day- in a school know for its high population of kids from low - income, poor - home life families- asked the students to write down what they want to do when they grow up. She was quite heartbroken to see that one student wanted to go to jail. That isn't going to be helped by any self - control test.
Ouch ! Very sad, and 100% coming from the environnement around that kid.
Wow, never heard of this test before, and I'm kind of glad. Having had a decidedly NOT wealthy or stable childhood environment...I probably wouldn't have waited.
I wonder how much psychology has studied the various effects of poverty on kids? Not like "are they more depressed" but things like eating habits or financial ones. If you go hungry a lot as a kid, does that mean you'll be better at controlling diet later on in life, or not? If you never had a lot of money, does that somehow make you incapable of saving up money when you grow up? (Or if not incapable, it's a LOT harder to stick to a budget and so on)
I love this channel. I never got to take psychology in school. :) Thanks for the interesting content!
I just pictured my five year old self being given infinitely doubling marshmallows on 15 minute intervals, begging for it to stop. "Please, no, I don't want them! They're gross!"
The psychologist who famously did this research wrote a book by the same name (and comes in audiobook form). He goes into detail on what his research is useful for. The emphasis is less on "willpower" and more on using techniques for avoiding temptation. These can be learned and practiced.
Einstein: well...
Also Einstein: gimme that g*dd*mn marshmallow
If my brother would be there, he’ll eat the first marshmallow right in front of researcher
At 4:05 you say:
"The effect all but disappeared"
But doesn't that mean that it didn't disappear at all?
All but -> Everything except
So: It did everything, except disappear. So it didn't disappear?
Sorry, I'm not a native English speaker, maybe that's just a saying?
It's a figure of speech/saying, generally used to mean "almost entirely/completely" or something similar to that effect. So "when accounting for x, y was reduced to the point of nonimportance". that's where the all *but* comes from, all disappeared *but* a little (if anything). Hopefully that makes sense? ^^"
@@3possumsinatrenchcoat Ah, as I thought. Still, sounds a bit odd.
@@MetsuryuVids that's fair. having heard it all my life it never struck me that way, but thinking on the literal meaning you're right, it is a bit odd of a phrase.
"No one waits around for some hypothetical reward that they don't believe it's actually coming"
isn't that religion in a nutshell? *Runs Away from Comments*
I see that my prophetical powers are still sharp as usual
And to answer thine question - I think that's more about bribe in a nutshell
Well, religious people actually do believe the hypothetical reward is coming. That's more the reason why some people raised in religious households eventually become atheists or agnostics.
@@TheChocoXCheese "Well, religious people actually do believe the hypothetical reward is coming" Like myself? So, mind-reader - how many fingers am I thinking about?
"some people raised in religious households eventually become atheists or agnostics" Which is really just a lazy _non sequitur_ way to address the topic rather than analyzing the subtleties of the socioeconomical variables involved; but most people enjoy their _non sequitur_ lives for their own sake, and if I try to think otherwise, that's on me...
@@thstroyur Are you claiming that religious people /don't/ have faith? Because all I said was that religious people believe in something unproven, and those who leave religion don't believe. No judgement either way.
@@TheChocoXCheese I dunno - are you claiming that religious creed reduces to 'be nice so you get your hypothetical (scientifically "unproven") reward'?
"I said was that religious people believe in something unproven" - plus "some people raised in religious households eventually become atheists or agnostics", i.e. sociology. But then again, I guess someone misses the point of "belief" here - everything that's true gotta be proven, huh? So how do you prove the statement that everything that's true gotta be proven? Thru the power of lazy thinking, I suppose...
If I was given that test, I would have been too busy squishing the marshmallow. I like to play with things and see how they work
4:50 change your environment so you don't have to exert willpower.
"Doctor, doctor! It hurts when I do this!"
"Well don't DO that!"
Is it reasonable to tell a patient with no home support or means to stay off their broken ankles?
Cool video, I'm writing a school project on this topic, thank you for explaining 😉👍
I thought I'd be determined to click the subscribe button, but it turns out I don't have as much willpower as I thought 🤣
They tried to do this test to me in Health class except I literally did not listen at all so instead of having no self control I just had obliviousness
whew, and i thought i'm doomed to fail as i would not have waited for that second marshmallow.
Is it presumed that every child WANTS a second marshmallow? Is sugar an undeniable commodity to every four year old? Or did some kids just think that waiting for the second marshmallow was the more desirable behavior, and decided to hold out to gain an inferred 'social chip'?
I could have figured out that some of the kids who waited for the second marshmallow weren't really struggling. Because of that impulse thing. I saw a blog about a woman who said she felt like she was hitting a wall whenever she took a jog that took her by a donut shop. I'm like seriously? Really? Willpower isn't even a thing when you don't have that problem in the first place.
I've watched a few videos on this experiment, and the thing I noticed is the kids sit in front of the marshmallow, staring at it, not leaving their seat to find something to get their mind off the deal. Yeah, if I was forced to just sit in front of a Big Mac and stare at it, it would be gone in a heartbeat, but if I had access to a TV, or books, or a computer, or a sibling, or chores to do, I could probably take my mind off of it.
I don't think anyone believes the Marshmallow Experiment is a panacea, but I think it might be a good place to start, just to see where your kid is at before you start him on counseling.
It be interesting to know how the kids that couldn't abstain eating that marshmallow faired later in life. They never mention that. I've only heard about how great the abstaining kids were doing.
Oh what a surprise dedication pays off, who would have thought
I don't know how I would have responded as a kid, but now I would eat the marshmallow, get up and leave because I got stuff to do 😁
I've kind of always known that there's a difference between a strong feeling held back and a weak feeling, despite them outwardly appearing the same...
How do they explain the kid that waited for the second marshmallow so that they could give it to their friend?
I wonder if they bothered asking if the kid actually LIKES marshmallows before they assumed this will require willpower from them
"Okay children, you can eat the marshmallow now..." *kid instantly gobbles down*"... or you can wait and have 3 later..."
Kid: "but how is that fair, I don't have a marshmallow to wait for."
Researcher realise test stupid and hands out the rest of marshmallows amongst the kids.
i still cant believe they didnt control for SES. that's like such a basic thing to do nowadays
Thanks for sharing. 😉👌🏼
This measures value judgements, not willpower. One might not want two marshmallows and might just want one. Or one might value a single marshmallow now more than two marshmallows in 15 minutes.
What if you were offered one marshmallow now, or two marshmallows in ten years? Almost everyone would choose one marshmallow now. This is a measure of value judgement (economics) not willpower.
What's bad in waiting, even if you don't get a second marshmallow
Can I be that guy and say that we shouldn't say "wealth" is part of a metric that may contribute to such factors? With the college entrance scandal and all kind of making a point that wealth does not always have such an affect.
May be more accurate to assume better "resources"; money, access to opportunities, parenting strategies, etc.
i really can't resist candy in the house. i just don't buy any
Similar to alcoholics continuously working on staying sober. Focus on it every day, keep your environment clear of temptation etc.
The ones with great willpower become Green Lanterns.
When psychologists make conclusions without taking neuroscience as much into account as they should
I'm still waiting on that second marshmallow.
Very intelligent argument !
SciShow Psych: "No one can control that impulse forever."
Me: "That sounds like a challenge!"
[Five minutes later]
Me: "Dammit."
I'd do really well with that test if i were tested back then. Reason is even simpler than the video description. I never liked plain marshmallows.
These tests showed that a stable home life with a father present had the greatest influence on delayed gratification and future life success.
what about the rate of depression? any correlations?
Could you do something on "rage rooms" I'd like something more than what Psychology today has to say on the matter.
Oh weird I remember Hank hosting a video on those. I'll see if I can find it
Welp, i can control myself no matter the situation, as long as i want to.
I ate the marshmallow of the kid sitting next to me.
When I'm fasting, not having food available does wonders. Also, I imagine myself eating, with exquisite detail, what I'm tempted to eat at the moment. This tricks the brain somehow and lowers the craving to make it tolerable (I got the idea from a research about this).
In the Devil's Advocate the say that God tells you to: "Look but don't touch. Touch, but don't taste. Taste, don't swallow". This is it. There are layers of temptation and every following layer is harder to resist. Do you want to win over it? Don't look at it or even think of it. Change your "mind subject" as soon as you see the idea popping up (like if you where meditating).
Relativity...if only researchers knew and kept within their order of motions the Full implications of the word Relativity, Einstein would be a very much happy man to see just how much more farther his original idea gets beyond that of what he first realized for it when he made cases around it. But you getting closer.
Who else thought the “Skillshare” was coming instead of “practice?”
Have you ever read about or listened to what the professor that contacted the original experiment says? They strongly believe that will power is something that can be learned.
Great, now I want to eat a marshmallow...
I never liked marshmallows, i would of aced this.
unless you didn't like it to the point that eating just one now is more than enough.
What if I just don't like marshmallows that much?
Can you make a video about what drives people into scribbling horrible crap into their skin in a permanent way ?
When I was a kid I didn’t even like marshmallows
It's like how I don't take my money with me when I go places so that I can't impulse buy something. When I do have money, it's because I have a specific item I want which also means I won't impulse buy. Amazon is evil.
Yeah my mom makes fun of me for that. If I dont intend to buy stuff I dont bring any money. Then she impulsively goes to a store and chastises me for not having chip-ins
I don't understand. Whatever you explained was what anyone would deduce from that expt. There were people who actually thought training kids with marsmallows would change their will power?
1:14 SAT? The hell is that, please?
It's a standarized test in the US that students usually take in senior high. It's gotten better over the years, but many flawed studies done on test results have led to some pretty awful stereotypes separating along socioethnic lines. It's short for Scholastic Assessment Test, but I prefer the mneumonic "Shut your Ass and Take it".
@@tiffyw92Lol, OK. And senior year? That's around what? 16, 18?
@@ZoidbergForPresident Junior or senior year, so yeah, 16-17.
How does this impact my chances of becoming a Green Lantern?
I might persuade other kids to give me their marshmallows
Where is link to recommended video?