3 ms·

I think you're misunderstanding The Desire To Pass Tests, and GP's point about it. One choice of the Marshmallow Test results in a bigger number and one choice

by lmkg 8y ago

I think you're misunderstanding The Desire To Pass Tests, and GP's point about it. One choice of the Marshmallow Test results in a bigger number and one choice results in a smaller number. To a person with The Desire To Pass Tests, this is interpreted as equivalent to the score on a school test. In other words, the bigger number signals that one answer is correct, to someone who looks out for those signals. This is not saying that the choice is correct, in an inherent sense, and I think that's what you're getting hung up on. The Marshmallow Test measures behavior choices and there's no objective correct answer, but those behavior choices may have a reason or a reasoning framework behind them. And that reasoning framework may be an already-instilled belief that given two options, one option is correct and it's important to choose that option. In other words, the behavioral choice is to treat the experiment as a school test and try to pass that test.

jasode 8y ago
Reply to both Cogito and lmkg since they are similar counterpoints: >Cogito: "maximum number of marshmallows"* >lmkg: "the bigger number signals that one answer is correct," If the child doesn't trust or believe the researcher (a stranger), then in his mind, the 1 marshmallow is a bigger number than zero marshmallows promised later. Because "later" could translate to "never", and "2 marshmallows" could translate to "0 marshmallows". Is it possible for a few, or some of the very young 4-year old children to meta-analyze the situation and conclude "you can't trick me, this is really a test!" ?? Sure, but Smaug123 contended that this reasoning process generalized to the test population. If we want to entertain the fact that children want to "please" adults to "pass a test", we also have to accept that they can interpret the situation as "evaluating promises of future rewards being kept or broken" and rationally choose 1 marshmallow as the optimum decision. Choosing 1 now is also "passing a test" if we insist on framing it as a "test" in the vein of Hercules 12 labors. ("See mom, you told me to never trust strangers and so I got the 1 marshmallow right away.") If we still want to hang on to the idea that 4-year olds keep reinterpreting life interactions as a "test to pass", a lot of frustrated parents are going to wonder... "why can't Johnny see that keeping to himself instead of pulling his sisters hair to get a piece of candy later is a TEST TO PASS?!? He just keeps misbehaving!" <-- If that situation is happening, it means overlaying observed behavior (both wanted & unwanted behaviors) with a framework of "desire to pass a test" is overestimating its explanatory power.

by lmkg 8y ago

jasode 8y ago

Reply to both Cogito and lmkg since they are similar counterpoints: >Cogito: "maximum number of marshmallows"* >lmkg: "the bigger number signals that one answer is correct," If the child doesn't trust or believe the researcher (a stranger), then in his mind, the 1 marshmallow is a bigger number than zero marshmallows promised later. Because "later" could translate to "never", and "2 marshmallows" could translate to "0 marshmallows". Is it possible for a few, or some of the very young 4-year old children to meta-analyze the situation and conclude "you can't trick me, this is really a test!" ?? Sure, but Smaug123 contended that this reasoning process generalized to the test population. If we want to entertain the fact that children want to "please" adults to "pass a test", we also have to accept that they can interpret the situation as "evaluating promises of future rewards being kept or broken" and rationally choose 1 marshmallow as the optimum decision. Choosing 1 now is also "passing a test" if we insist on framing it as a "test" in the vein of Hercules 12 labors. ("See mom, you told me to never trust strangers and so I got the 1 marshmallow right away.") If we still want to hang on to the idea that 4-year olds keep reinterpreting life interactions as a "test to pass", a lot of frustrated parents are going to wonder... "why can't Johnny see that keeping to himself instead of pulling his sisters hair to get a piece of candy later is a TEST TO PASS?!? He just keeps misbehaving!" <-- If that situation is happening, it means overlaying observed behavior (both wanted & unwanted behaviors) with a framework of "desire to pass a test" is overestimating its explanatory power.