I've read that if a child can resist eating something sweet placed in front of them, with the promise that willpower will lead to a reward of more sweets, it suggests that they have inner strength and are destined for life success. My response to this, since becoming a parent, is a despairing eye roll, because it is abundantly clear to me that neither one of my children would pass this test, even for a moment. In fact, my children are willing to risk significant negative implications to steal candies, should the opportunity present itself. I have decided not to guess what this might mean about their destiny.
A study that has just come out by Watts, Duncan, and Quan, suggests that this type of test (classically termed "the marshmallow test") is not an accurate predictor of either future stamina or achievement. Instead, it's a reflection of the child's privilege. In other words, a child is willing to wait to eat a marshmallow if he or she comes from a wealthier household, or one with more educated parents.
At first glance, this seems like a very rational realization with regard to the original study. Of course, if kids are poor, they'll be hungry and used to scarce resources, and want to eat any nearby marshmallow right away instead of waiting. The original authors were foolish not to more carefully account for the effects of income level on children's abilities to delay gratification. As I considered it further, though, I've known many privileged and wealthy children who don't seem to have much ability to delay gratification at all. Isn't that the definition of being "spoiled"? What's the difference between a spoiled kid and a rich kid who can delay gratification?
The Atlantic Article I linked to above ["Why Rich Kids Are So Good At The Marshmallow Test", June 1 2018] notes "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." Thus, the spoiled kids and those who were rich but 'unspoiled' were equally successful by the measures of this study. I would be interested in an deeper exploration of the these two groups to investigate whether there were actually differences beyond those two measured variables. In the meantime, though, perhaps the easiest thing is to conclude that 4 year olds can't resist marshmallows, and that's no cause for concern.
All material © Alison Schroth Hayward, MD. All rights reserved.
A study that has just come out by Watts, Duncan, and Quan, suggests that this type of test (classically termed "the marshmallow test") is not an accurate predictor of either future stamina or achievement. Instead, it's a reflection of the child's privilege. In other words, a child is willing to wait to eat a marshmallow if he or she comes from a wealthier household, or one with more educated parents.
At first glance, this seems like a very rational realization with regard to the original study. Of course, if kids are poor, they'll be hungry and used to scarce resources, and want to eat any nearby marshmallow right away instead of waiting. The original authors were foolish not to more carefully account for the effects of income level on children's abilities to delay gratification. As I considered it further, though, I've known many privileged and wealthy children who don't seem to have much ability to delay gratification at all. Isn't that the definition of being "spoiled"? What's the difference between a spoiled kid and a rich kid who can delay gratification?
I've known many privileged and wealthy children who don't seem to have much ability to delay gratification at all. Isn't that the definition of being "spoiled"? What's the difference between a spoiled kid and a rich kid who can delay gratification?
The Atlantic Article I linked to above ["Why Rich Kids Are So Good At The Marshmallow Test", June 1 2018] notes "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." Thus, the spoiled kids and those who were rich but 'unspoiled' were equally successful by the measures of this study. I would be interested in an deeper exploration of the these two groups to investigate whether there were actually differences beyond those two measured variables. In the meantime, though, perhaps the easiest thing is to conclude that 4 year olds can't resist marshmallows, and that's no cause for concern.
All material © Alison Schroth Hayward, MD. All rights reserved.
No comments:
Post a Comment