 |
Couple Updates Facebook Status at Altar |
 |
Sex Offender Shuffle |
 |
Recreating the Matrix In Legos |
 |
Alexander Hamilton Rap |
All trademarks and copyrights on this page are owned by their respective owners. Comments are owned by the Poster. The Rest © 1997-2009 Geeknet, Inc.
mmm... Marshmallos (Score:5, Insightful)
The question now becomes: Can you teach this concept of self discipline to kids or are they born with it? To say that the kid who eats the marshmallow won't be successful is a bit misleading. I know for a fact that I would have eaten the marshmallow at that age. However, I was a 'B' student in school, I have a good career and a loving family. I don't live pay check to pay check. I would say I have succeeded in life.
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
success is very subjective. Can't really measure it and can't really perform any tests to determine it.
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
I know people who would sell their own mother's soul to work in production. It sounds like in spite of the study's conclusions, he's doing just fine.
Re: (Score:2)
Re:yuck, Marshmallos (Score:5, Funny)
I could easily resist the marshmallow. I see it going like this:
"OK, gnick, we're going to place this beer right here in front of you. Your job is to..."
"I'm sorry - I wasn't listening. This beer is empty, can I have another?" *BURP*
Re:mmm... Marshmallos (Score:5, Insightful)
To say that the kid who eats the marshmallow won't be successful is a bit misleading.
It's also a mischaracterization of what's said in the video.
If you watch the video, he says that 100% of the children who didn't succumb were successful students, but that 80% of the ones who did were having school problems.
So nobody is saying that if you ate it you won't be successful (just that you're less likely to be), and nobody is saying that you wouldn't be successful in life, but in school.
So your post really has nothing whatsoever to do with the article, or any of the statements or claims within.
Re: (Score:2, Interesting)
Maybe you should read the New Yorker article linked many times below. They are precisely saying the kids who ate the marshmallow were less successful in life, not only in school. The original researcher followed the subjects for decades, and the ones who gave in had drug problems, were fatter, had worse SAT scores, fewer friendships, and behavioral problems as kids. All this in addition to doing worse in school.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
The question now becomes: Can you teach this concept of self discipline to kids or are they born with it?
Whether or not you can teach it, it's definitely possible to be born with it. I recall in 7th or 8th grade I took my Halloween candy plunderings and divvied them up among a dozen lunchbags, each labeled with week's date from then until Christmas. I delayed/stretched the sugar gratification from that one holiday through Thanksgiving until Christmas. My parents were flabbergasted, as they'd certainly never even considered such a thing, let alone taught it. To this day, I'm a hoarder of money and other assets.
Re: (Score:2)
The biggest sugar gratification festival in Britain is Easter -- supermarkets tend to fill half an aisle or more with packaged chocolate eggs. I'd typically get about 4 eggs, so about 1kg of chocolate in total.
My sister would have eaten all hers by the end of the week. I'd eat one piece each day, and make it last for months :-).
I'm a bit of a hoarder, but typically only until a special occasion comes up, when I use everything I've hoarded (hint: get me drunk on my birthday, or the last day of a music festiv
Re: (Score:2)
That reminds me of when I was a teenager, which probably explains more about my spending habits than the easter eggs...
Me, to my mum: "why don't you ever give me any money? Everyone else's parents give them money."
Mum: "because you never spend it."
Instead I was meant to ask for stuff. But then, the stuff I wanted she wasn't willing to buy (Warhammer, Magic: the Gathering cards, computer stuff) or else I wasn't willing to ask for (stuff for gf/bf, alcohol, nightclub cover charge) or wouldn't accept (asking f
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
For example:
Re: (Score:2)
The question now becomes: Can you teach this concept of self discipline to kids or are they born with it?
I'd say yes, and it can be ruined as well.
It can be trained if there's a reward at the end (e.g. higher mark, chance to enter university, etc.) For example, a student studies a difficult subject and then performs better in the course.
It can be ruined just as easily. If one can maintain at good marks without needing to study, there's no point in doing so. Forcing those students to study an easy subject creates latent feelings of "why am I doing this?" since there's no perceived benefit.
It can be broken en
Re: (Score:2)
For those who prefer text to video... (Score:3, Informative)
If you'd like to read more about this (Score:5, Insightful)
And if you don't like marshmallows? (Score:5, Insightful)
I had seen this previously, and always thought there was a flaw in the experiment...
I would have done very well in this simply because as a kid, I didn't really like marshmallows. Roasted on a fire, maybe... but raw? I could let that sit for as long as they wanted.
Fact is, the researchers didn't have a good enough budget. They got away with cheaping out on a couple bags of marshmallows instead of investing in some more sure-fire chocolate bars.
Then again, if somebody said I can't have a marshmallow, I might want it more... :)
Re: (Score:2)
I believe they did the same experiment with various treats including marshmallows, Oreo cookies, and other things that I can't recall off the top of my head.
Re: (Score:2, Funny)
Hot grits?
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
I think 100% of study participants managed to avoid the temptation of dumping the hot grits down their pants
Re: (Score:2)
I think 100% of study participants managed to avoid the temptation of dumping the hot grits down their pants
Not quite but oh did I try.
Re: (Score:2)
Re: (Score:2, Insightful)
If that's the case, then the conclusion would be: "Delayed gratification is a good indicator of future success, for people who like marshmallows." :P
Radio Lab (Score:4, Informative)
I heard a segment about this study on Radio Lab [wnyc.org] a while back. Very interesting, but the conclusions aren't quite as dramatic as the summary really makes them out to be
DNRTFA (Score:2)
So, this is like taking time off looking at porn to read the article?
Marshmallows are easy.. (Score:5, Funny)
And if they just suck on the marshmallow (Score:2)
If they just suck on the marshmallow, but don't swallow, they might be a past president!
Re:And if they just suck on the marshmallow (Score:5, Funny)
Washington won't eat the marshmallow and sneers at your plebian tastes.
Jefferson lights the marshmallow on fire, then lights other marshmallows from it.
Lincoln rips the marshmallow in half, then eats it, demonstrating that a marshmallow divided cannot survive.
U.S. Grant knocks the marshmallow on the floor in a drunken stupor. It's still under one of the White House sofas.
Teddy Roosevelt eats the marshmallow immediately, and asks you for another... while staring you down and carrying a rifle.
Calvin Coolidge waits until you give him the second marshmallow, then eats both without comment.
Franklin Roosevelt starts an government organization called Marshmallow Making Men, and soon has more marshmallows than he knows what to do with.
JFK doesn't eat either marshmallow, and what he later did with them, a containert of chocolate sauce, and Marilyn Monroe is lost to history.
Nixon has G. Gordon Liddy take your entire bag.
Jimmy Carter says "No thanks, I prefer peanuts".
Ronald Reagan waits, and eats both marshmallows, but only after getting Nancy's approval.
Bush Sr. says he won't eat the marshmallow, but does.
Bush Jr. eats the marshmallow immediately, and looks utterly and pathetically confused when he doesn't get the second one.
Obama notes the whiteness of the marshmallow and accuses the researchers of trying to set him up.
Re: (Score:3, Funny)
Very nice, props to you sir. However, it seems you left out a few of my favorites.
Andrew Jackson eats the first marshmallow and declares that if you want to keep the second from him, you can enforce it with your army.
Rutherford Hayes eats his marshmallow just as you re-enter the room, and is awarded his prize only after you confer with your panel of co-researchers.
Grover Cleveland eats the first marshmallow, but gets his second when he comes back two days later.
William Howard Taft eats the marshmallow, the
Re: (Score:2)
Re:And if they just suck on the marshmallow (Score:4, Funny)
I'm afraid Fox News didn't send me their list of talking points this week (I think Murdoch wants to charge for them), so I had to come up with that one all on my own. However, if you think there's any racism there, you're jumping at shado... oops, there I go again, right?
(In case anyone ELSE needs the joke explained, it's not implying that Obama is racist; it's implying that he's might be so concerned with image that he's afraid a black politician eating a white marshmallow would be read the wrong way, and paranoid enough to think that he's being given the marshmallow specifically for that purpose. Of course, considering Fox News, were the situation to come up he might actually be right.)
BS. (Score:3, Interesting)
No one is accounting for the fact that the second marshmallow may not only not be forthcoming, but that the original marshmallow might be taken away at the end of the interval, or even during the interval. Then the waiters are the ones with the poor decision process.
Why assume that the researchers are telling the truth? People who do psychological research on humans are a notoriously untrustworthy bunch.
It's that old saying (Score:2)
Re: (Score:3, Insightful)
You have really no control over the "reward". Sure you can satisfy the terms of some "promise" that you are going to get that marshmallow. OTOH, the one that's right in front of you is something that can be trusted on.
The problem of depending on someone giving you something rather than going out and getting it for yourself.
Complaint trusting people certainly can be expected to do better in a simulated factory/army environment (school).
Re: (Score:2)
I think you'd also find it does better in the "simulated' environment of most jobs, relationships, and structured civilized society. Most people and institutions I interact with on a given day are *not* trying to cheat me, and I would do pretty poorly in those situations if I assumed that they were. Now, that assumption probably does pretty poorly in the hood or in a war zone, but that's not what I'm planning on preparing my children for foremost.
Also, I'm pretty sure there's a high correlation between succ
Re:BS. (Score:5, Interesting)
In non-pathological environments, fairly large amounts of trust are mostly a good thing. Both psychologically, just because trust is more comfortable than paranoia, and socially, because most social activities require a modicum of trust to work effectively(playing a game with people you trust to be good sports is much more enjoyable than trying to build a ruleset that can restrain all cheaters without devolving into hardcore lawyering just sucks), and economically, because distrust effectively imposes deadweight losses(If I distrust you, I'll either have to vet you extensively, which costs money, or be offered a better than usual deal to offset my distrust, which, just as in the more typical taxation or monopoly examples, many transactions that would be mutually beneficial do not occur). Empirically, there has been some very interesting work on the correlation between levels of trust in a society and a society's economic success.
It wouldn't at all surprise me if, in aggregate(and under non-pathological social conditions), people who generally trust more easily mostly exhibit better outcomes in school and beyond(it would, of course, be very interesting to see if there is a class of notable outliers here, either high trust people who get shafted 24/7 or paranoid bastards who rise to the top, or both, possibly the latter feeding on the former). I'm sure self control is also a virtue in itself; but it could well be that self control plus social trust is even better.
As an aside, this is the reason(beyond any ethical/moral ones) that permitting fraud and deceit and dismissing them with an "eh, let the buyer beware" is a bad strategy. Trust is extremely useful, distrust is costly(but necessary if highly untrustworthy individuals are a danger). If trust is an irrational position in a given society, it will become progressively less common, leading to higher costs across the board.
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
If this is true, it means those kids are being set up to fail in life, the exposure to shifty characters is conditioning them with behaviors that discourage long-term relationships, calculated long-term financial risks, etc.
You have proposed and disputed the notion that thes
Re: (Score:3, Interesting)
I talked to a psychologist who dealt a lot with disadvantaged kids, mostly from families with a drug addicted parent. Her observation was that, for these kids, delayed gratification was illogical, because the reward in the future was highly uncertain in these kids' families. For these kids, it makes sense to eat the marshmallow, because the parents' promise that another marshmallow is coming was unreliable.
Idle (Score:5, Insightful)
Why is this in idle? This is actually an intelligent study worthy of reading. I would prefer the NYT article than the video, but overall this should be front page.
Now give me that damn marshmallow.
Re: (Score:2)
The most "successful" people are... (Score:2, Insightful)
the ones who can take their own immediate gratification, while inducing others to delay gratification, and then use this to their long-term advantage. E.g. Wall Street
Very interesting (Score:2)
I wonder if the real test is simply: How much do you like marshmallows, rather than how much self-control you have at age 4.
A marshmallow in the mouth... (Score:5, Interesting)
is worth over two on the table.
Delaying gratification is a form of risk taking; you're taking the risk that by delaying gratification now, you'll get greater gratification later.
If your experiences have led you to believe that you won't actually get the greater gratification, it's irrational for you to delay it. If the marshmallow will go stale sitting there and the second one won't actually be forthcoming, eat it now. If your savings are going to be destroyed by inflation, taxes and stock market crashes, spend the money now. If work expands to fill all available time, procrastinate now (or when you get around to it, anyway).
Re: (Score:2)
Eat your all grains now, you will have none to plant next year.
Sometimes, instant gratification is guaranteed to be harmful or be sub optimal. Kids from experiment are great example to what it leads eventually and demonstrate that as overall strategy, it is inferior. Because most of the time, investment will pay itself.
And its not investment strategy really. It is hunter-gatherer instinct to use resources right now because they might not be there tomorrow. Misapplied to modern world. Kids acted on instinct,
Experiment needs a control (Score:2)
As it was described there, the experiment is flawed: it doesn't necessarily test the ability to delay gratification for a larger reward.
They need to account for the percentage of kids who would not have eaten the marshmallow even without the possibility of a second marshmallow, i.e. the kids who aren't eating it because they were effectively told not to.
In other news...kids who hate marshmallows do well (Score:4, Informative)
In other news, kids who hate marshmallows do well in life!
I could wait until after work to read Slashdot... (Score:2)
... or I could say f*ck it and read it now.
Everyone here obviously knows that those enlightened souls who read Slashdot during the work-day are better educated about, y'know ... "Stuff that matters".. and will as a result be more successful.
57th post! (Score:2)
and thus have i demonstrated my cognitive superiority to you, mr. first post man
so realizing this (Score:2)
If I now realize that I'm a marshmellow eater, can I start recognizing that behavior and correct it. Thereby becoming more successful and have a happier life?
I had one child who went into the Montessori school and one of the things that they do, is not let you go onto the next activity until you've mastered the current one. These activities are all in very incremental steps and by the time he entered kindergarden he was able to add subtract, read and write, and had a basic understanding of multiplication.