6 ms·
> Think about Japan, where kids are often taught to wait quietly for meals or gifts Author got the country and items correct but not associated correctly. In J
by RheingoldRiver 2y ago
> Think about Japan, where kids are often taught to wait quietly for meals or gifts
Author got the country and items correct but not associated correctly. In Japan, kids pass the marshmallow test with flying colors but fail the same test if it's a gift. In America kids generally pass the gift test (hypothesis is that they're used to waiting for presents on Christmas).
source - https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-culture-affects-the-marshmallow-test/ https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/how-culture-affec...
another source - https://www.colorado.edu/today/2022/07/21/new-take-marshmallow-test-when-it-comes-resisting-temptation-childs-cultural-upbringing https://www.colorado.edu/today/2022/07/21/new-take-marshmall...
- forgotoldacc 2y agoAnother thing is there's the difference between getting a guaranteed reward that you want (two marshmallows) vs waiting for the unknown. What good is waiting if a kid could potentially have 15 minutes of fun time with a toy, but they instead wait for two gifts and all they get is a pair of socks? But I was also a kid who'd beg nonstop to open my presents early. I knew if I opened something early, that was more time with a cool game or something. If I waited, well, that was less time with the cool game. Plus most of the presents weren't interesting. There was just one thing I wanted in particular and the other stuff could be forgotten.
- watwut 2y agoMarshmallow test is one of those things real psychologists (whether practical or science) just do not care all that much about, but pop culture is sure obsessed with it.
- rahimnathwani 2y agoThe original paper has been cited 2000 times: https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&scioq=marshmallow+test&q=shoda+mischel+peake&oq=shoda+mischel https://scholar.google.com/scholar?hl=en&as_sdt=0%2C5&scioq=... That's a lot of citations for something they 'just do not care' about.
- DiscourseFan 2y agoPsychologists, in my experience, seem to be strangely unaware of what is taken seriously by other psychologists. They're generally 50/50 on Freud, for instance, and the half who don't care much for him also don't think anyone does.
- Lionga 2y agoProbably because Psychology is super individual und culturally dependent. Nothing Psychologists ever "find out" generally applies, but just happens in their little circle und their circumstances in their time.
- DiscourseFan 2y agoExcept the incest taboo, which is not culturally dependent.
- wincy 2y agoI don’t know, I read a Pakistan Today article where a doctor said cousin marriage is no big deal as it “only” causes defects in 2% of cases. Interestingly, this article is now impossible to find on Google. You can find a dozen news articles of people in the UK arguing about this. Hopefully the discourse is shifting, but a culture can be dysfunctional (like allowing first cousin or even worse double first cousin marriages, for example) for a very long time before it collapses.
- DiscourseFan 2y agoEverywhere has an incest taboo, just not necessarily the same one.
- rusk 2y agoPretty sure I could find cousins marrying in Arkansas. No need to go to Pakistan. Ugly though it may be, it’s not big-I incest.
- rusk 2y agoThey do care about it. It’s an immensely important milestone in the development of the field, and is pretty much axiomatic as a developmental marker and has been widely and consistently replicated. Where modern day psychology diverges is (as discussed in the article) on the conclusions and analysis.
- christophilus 2y agoCounterpoint: https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jun/01/famed-impulse-control-marshmallow-test-fails-in-new-research https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jun/01/famed-impu...
- rusk 2y agoMy point of view is based on this very paywalled article. In science a study doesn’t just become bunk just because its original conclusions no longer hold, or because a journalist says so. The data is solid and is widely replicated. All the guardian article attacks is the analysis and conclusions. And it is correct to do so, as that is how scientific discourse works. The journalist was however incorrect in saying it had been debunked. Mischel is indeed still taught and students are taught to think critically about it. Modern pedagogy uses it as a solid reference point both in terms of development and also in the limitations of empirical data. Psychology is not like other sciences. It’s very nature is questioning established shibboleths and you’d be crazy to think that prevalent thought hadn’t moved on from a study done more than 50 years ago.
- watwut 2y agoThe guy who made the original hypotheses disagree with you. The issue is that data are not solid and are not widely replicated. And especially, the point is overstated. The guy who made the original hypotheses also literally says that marshmallow test is bad proxy for the trait under question.
- rusk 2y agoGroundbreaking research is groundbreaking research regardless of how well it holds up over time. Obviously it’s been supersceded but that just demonstrates the vitality of the field.
- christophilus 2y agoI think you’re right. It is one of the many studies that has failed to replicate[0]. [0] https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jun/01/famed-impulse-control-marshmallow-test-fails-in-new-research https://www.theguardian.com/education/2018/jun/01/famed-impu...
- Aurornis 2y agoNot quite. Psychology is a big field and the range of educational practices is very broad. There are some excellent psychologists out there, but there are also a lot of trained psychologists who embrace all of the pop-culture and even pseudoscience trends in full.