The Marshmellow test

danmand

Well-known member
Nov 28, 2003
46,971
5,606
113
In the 1960s, Stanford University psychologist Walter Mischel conducted a longitudinal study.

Mischel placed marshmallows in front of hungry four-year-old children. He told them they could have one now, or if they could wait several minutes, they could have two. Some quickly grabbed the marshmallow and ate it. Others waited.

The psychologist followed the group and found that 14 years later, the children who eagerly devoured the first marshmallow weren't faring as well as the children who had waited for two marshmallows.

The “grabbers” suffered low self-esteem, were prone to envy, and easily frustrated.

The "wait-for-two-fers" possessed better coping skills, were more socially competent, optimistic, self-assertive, dependable, trustworthy, and scored about 210 points higher on their SATs.

The enduring lesson of this study, and of life in general? Be patient
 
danmand said:
In the 1960s, Stanford University psychologist Walter Mischel conducted a longitudinal study.

Mischel placed marshmallows in front of hungry four-year-old children. He told them they could have one now, or if they could wait several minutes, they could have two. Some quickly grabbed the marshmallow and ate it. Others waited.

The psychologist followed the group and found that 14 years later, the children who eagerly devoured the first marshmallow weren't faring as well as the children who had waited for two marshmallows.

The “grabbers” suffered low self-esteem, were prone to envy, and easily frustrated.

The "wait-for-two-fers" possessed better coping skills, were more socially competent, optimistic, self-assertive, dependable, trustworthy, and scored about 210 points higher on their SATs.

The enduring lesson of this study, and of life in general? Be patient


So the ARE ways to accurately test the young for effective culling..... More should be done on this.
 
themexi said:
So the ARE ways to accurately test the young for effective culling..... More should be done on this.

Unfortunately, that would likely mean a slow end to Terb. I suppose the
youngsters who show negative correlation with delayed gratification are
statistically more likely to show up on terb.
 
Now, should I go for an hour with my favourite lady from Mirage this weekend, or should I work on that possible relationship with the lady I met at a party a few weeks ago? We all know the answer to that one. I guess I am just a one marshmellow kinda guy. :D
 
danmand said:
The “grabbers” suffered low self-esteem, were prone to envy, and easily frustrated.

The "wait-for-two-fers" possessed better coping skills, were more socially competent, optimistic, self-assertive, dependable, trustworthy, and scored about 210 points higher on their SATs.

The enduring lesson of this study, and of life in general? Be patient
Or rather what it probably showed is that the more intelligent children with better coping skills, had better impulse control and were able to think through the problem better and that this continued through life.

The real lesson "choose your parents wisely." :cool:
 
Aardvark154 said:
Or rather what it probably showed is that the more intelligent children with better coping skills, had better impulse control and were able to think through the problem better and that this continued through life.

The real lesson "choose your parents wisely." :cool:


In all seriousness, we NEED to start testing future adults young.

Keep the tests as accurate as possible, allow for improvement, but we need to start using these kinds of tests for the betterment of society. The benefits are immense:

1) Identifying problem people as early as possible so that steps can be taken to correct them before it becomes too costly or more likely, futile. It will save HUGE resources. No wasting $$ on schooling & social services on those who won't benefit, leaving more to help those who will do well do even better. In extreme cases we will even be able to identify consistently problematic families & remove their impact on society entirely through aggressive means.

2) Helping both parents & the child set realistic expectations for life. No more dull witted talentless people being led to believe they can "be anything they want" & becoming resentful. and the dullards shovels& brooms & set society up so that they are actually proud of what they contribute & others respect them for what they actually are.

Pushy parents who refuse to accept their crotchfruit are anything less than the next messiah would be replaced by parents that realize that people are a product of their parents & the environment the parents provide, and if they can't make top quality, they get what they get & that's it. No blame, just acceptance. If they can't accept it, then maybe they should leave the breeding to superior stock.

3) Such a system would also lead to more people asking for help at an appropriately early time. Parents could be taught what works & what doesn't in parenting & make the very best of what they have. If it is all spelled out up front what to expect as far as consequences, there will be few excuses. Taxpayers would be far happier paying $ to the system if they knew that it would not be wasted on lost causes. Parents could actually find themselves in a situation where they could honestly say that everything reasonable that could have been done was done... eliminating most bitterness. Children in general would benefit from the increased trust & respect their fellow citizens would give them when all the worry of feral bastard children as become a distant memory.

4) Class systems if fairly & consistently applied with a Meritocracy in mind Work, and they work well. Everyone knows they are what they have proven they cn do. No bullshitting, no blme except on the creators of the problem.

5) Our justice systems could be streamlined in a revolutionary manner. A persons Whole life is put on trial. Those tht consistantly contribute to society & judged unlikely to be habitully criminal could be let off with much lighter sentences for even severe mistakes, so long as full reparations cn be mde. Those who are troubled troughout thier lives are judged & given te same chnce. If their life has been nothing but a drain on society, even the most minor of offenses could be fairly considered the last straw, & more permenent steps can be taken to remove their toxic influence. It would save time & conserve tax, penal & social resources. Justice woud also be fast after a short time because there would be far fewer repeat offenders. It5 would lso eliminate a lot of the injustices that mandtory sentencing for offenses cause. They are only there due to the vst hordes of deficient characters out there.

Test them, sort them, prune the dead wood as early as possible
 
Is it a valid test?

These kids were not brought up in a closed enviornment, there are external forces that shape their traits and personalities. There experiences in life also will cause them to act differently.

There was a so called dog expert that had a listed different breed of dogs and listed them in the order of inteligence. The husky was listed in the middle of the pack, not the smartest, but in his opinion not the dummest dog. The test he used to determine the inteligence of a dog was to throw a towel over the dogs head and if the dog got the towel off in the quickest time, this would determine the dog had a higher inteligence. I can tell you that huskies have unique personalities, if the dog trusted you he would not be in a hurry to get the towel off. If the dog was tired or was playful, this would change the amount of time the dog would take to get the towel off. These test were done with one dog of each breed, so was this a valid test to determine how inteligent a breed of dog is?

Is the test to determine if a kid has low esteme if he is a grabber and if he is a two-fer he would become respected and sucessful in life?
 
My father performed that test on me as well, except he used a shot of whiskey instead of a marshmallow.

He carefully put the first shot on the table in front of me and told me that if I waited until the big hand landed on the three, he would give me two shots instead of the one.

When the big hand landed on the two I grabbed his gun and blew a hole in his head - He was dead before he hit the floor. I patiently leaned over the table, grabbed the bottle and chugged it back.

I think I ended up pretty normal...
 
Ref said:
...I grabbed his gun and blew a hole in his head - He was dead before he hit the floor. I patiently leaned over the table, grabbed the bottle and chugged it back.

I think I ended up pretty normal...
I beg to differ. Had you been more normal -- you would have been patient enough to use the gun to coerce your father into handing over his ID or to purchase more whisky to keep the supply flowing. But you had to be gratified with the one bottle instead.

Failure :p
 
WhaWhaWha said:
I beg to differ. Had you been more normal -- you would have been patient enough to use the gun to coerce your father into handing over his ID or to purchase more whisky to keep the supply flowing. But you had to be gratified with the one bottle instead.

Failure
Father's dead. Uses father's wallet to purchase more whiskey. WIN WIN WIN (whiskey, more whiskey, father dead).
Success;)
 
Ref said:
My father performed that test on me as well, except he used a shot of whiskey instead of a marshmallow.

He carefully put the first shot on the table in front of me and told me that if I waited until the big hand landed on the three, he would give me two shots instead of the one.

When the big hand landed on the two I grabbed his gun and blew a hole in his head - He was dead before he hit the floor. I patiently leaned over the table, grabbed the bottle and chugged it back.

I think I ended up pretty normal...


Ref,

That sceanario only played out in your head as you lay unconscious next to your father silently drinking the whisky from the bottle. What realy happened was that you father told you that he would give you two shots instead of one if you waited till the hand landed on three. When the hand landed on three, you reached for your first shot and he slugged you with the bottle and said there your second shot then proceeded to drink your shot in the glass on the table and then the rest of the bottle of whisky in silence with you laying on the floor.:eek:
 
themexi said:
In all seriousness, we NEED to start testing future adults young.




Test them, sort them, prune the dead wood as early as possible


kill the children. thats your solution? let me guess...you voted conservative?
 
What about overly horny men given a choice of a half hour session for free early this week or wait two months and get 3 one hour sessions for free. I wonder what most terbites would choose? :eek:
 
Jade4u said:
What about overly horny men given a choice of a half hour session for free early this week or wait two months and get 3 one hour sessions for free. I wonder what most terbites would choose? :eek:


We would take neither. There is no such thing as a free f**K.
 
danmand said:
We would take neither. There is no such thing as a free f**K.


You don't play along nicely now do you? :p Imagine just imagine your fave sp turned out to be overly horny and wanted some more action on the side and offered this deal for a review or something.
 
Jade4u said:
You don't play along nicely now do you? :p Imagine just imagine your fave sp turned out to be overly horny and wanted some more action on the side and offered this deal for a review or something.

I Guess in that case I would take it immidiately, 'cause she would
soon come to her senses and retract the offer.
 
red said:
kill the children. thats your solution? let me guess...you voted conservative?


Not necessarily... if they can be made to serve some useful purpose that would be a waste. Workhouses, plantations & cannon fodder come to mind. If they are nothing but a drag on & a danger to decent hardworking people than yes, their contribution may as well be organ donations & fertilizer.

That people like that are allowed to vote & their teeming masses pretty much assure that voting is all but worthless.
 
themexi said:
Not necessarily... if they can be made to serve some useful purpose that would be a waste. Workhouses, plantations & cannon fodder come to mind. If they are nothing but a drag on & a danger to decent hardworking people than yes, their contribution may as well be organ donations & fertilizer.

That people like that are allowed to vote & their teeming masses pretty much assure that voting is all but worthless.
My mind turns to the concept of the "multiple vote" of Nevil Shute's novel In The Wet. Which to my mind is worth consideration.