Marshmallows: Not As Bad For You As You Thought

Will this little girl's love of marshmallows doom her to failure later in life?Image Source/ZUMAPRESS

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.

You know all about the marshmallow test, don’t you? A researcher shows kids a marshmallow and tells them they can eat it now, or, if they wait a bit, they can have two marshmallows. If the kid waits, it shows excellent self-discipline and the ability to delay gratitude, which helps in later life.

There’s only one problem: the studies demonstrating this are kind of crappy: small sample sizes, upper middle class kids, etc. Recently, though, a professor at NYU came across an old NIH study that administered the marshmallow test to a thousand diverse 4-year-olds. When the kids were recontacted at age 15, the results were dismal: there was hardly any correlation at all between doing well on the marshmallow test and doing well later in life. But over at Vox, Brian Resnick tells us there was this:

His paper also found something that they still can’t make sense of. Most of the predictive power of the marshmallow test can be accounted for kids waiting just making it 20 seconds before they decide to eat the treat. “So being able to wait for two minutes, five minutes, or seven minutes, 2 min, 5 min, or 7 min, the max, it didn’t really have any additional benefits over being able to wait for 20 seconds.”

That makes it hard to imagine the kids are engaging in some sort of complex cognitive trick to stay patient, and that patient. It makes it hard to imagine the test is revealing something deep and lasting about their potential in life. And perhaps it’s an indication that the marshmallow experiment test is not a great test of delay of gratification or some other underlying measure of self-control.

I disagree! First of all, 20 seconds is a long time for a four-year-old. What’s more, those first 20 seconds are the most important. When it comes to emotional control, the biggest difference is not between the person who waits a few minutes to make a decision vs. the person who sleeps on it overnight. The biggest difference is between either of them and the person who’s always popping off instantly over something. That could be something as small as an impulse purchase or as large as getting into a bar fight over an imagined slight. In either case, if you make the effort to think for even a few seconds, you’re miles ahead.

That said, I doubt the marshmallow test really tells us much. But if it tells us anything, it’s probably about the value of not being a hothead.

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate