The Marshmallow Test

The Marshmallow Test!

(adapted from Emotional Intelligence by Daniel Goleman p. 80)

 Imagine that you are 4 years old and someone makes you the following offer: If you can wait until after he has completed an errand, then you will get 2 marshmallows for a treat. If you can’t wait till then, you will get only one marshmallow, but you can have it immediately. That’s a challenge to any 4-year old! It is a microcosm of the eternal battle between impulse and restraint, id and ego, desire and self-control, gratification and delay. Which of these choices a child makes is a prediction of much of his or her future. It reveals not only his/her present character, but manifests the future trajectory the child will take in life.

There is perhaps no psychological skill more fundamental than resisting impulse. It is the root of all emotional self-control, since all emotions, by their very nature lead to one or other impulse to act. The root meaning of the word EMOTION, is to “move”. The capacity to resist that impulse to act, to squelch it from the start, is evidence of and promotes the persons success-ability.

A remarkable study in which the marshmallow challenge was done of 4-year olds during the 1960s at a pre-school on the Stanford University Campus, and involving mainly children of Stanford graduate students, by psychologist Walter Mischel provide proof of how important the ability to restrain one’s emotions and so delay impulse is. The study tracked the four year olds until they finished high school. Some 4-year olds had been able to wait what must have seemed an eternity – 15-20 minutes – before the experimenter returned. Some, to sustain themselves in their determination, had covered their eyes, so as not to have to stare at the temptation, or rested their heads in their arms; others talked to themselves, sang, played games with their hands and feet; some even tried to sleep. Those kids got the 2-marshmallow reward! But others, more impulsive, grabbed the one marshmallow within seconds of the experimenter leaving the room on his “errand”.

The diagnostic power of how this moment of impulse was handled became clear 12-14 years later, when the evolution of those same children was studied. The difference between the grab-the-marshmallow-now kids and those who had been able to wait for 2-marshmallows-later was amazing, both at emotional and social-success levels. Those who had resisted temptation at 4 years of age, were now in their late teens more socially competent: personally effective, self-assertive, and better able to cope with the frustrations of life. They were less likely to go to pieces, freeze, or regress under stress. They embraced challenges and pursued them instead of giving up in the face of difficulties. They were self-reliant and confident, trustworthy and dependable. They took initiatives and committed themselves to projects not only for themselves but for their community. And they were still able to delay gratification in pursuit of their goals.

One third of them, who had grabbed the one marshmallow, tended to have fewer of these qualities, and their profile overall manifested many psychological problems. They shied away from social contacts; were indecisive, easily upset by frustrations. They tended to think of themselves as unworthy and harboured a poor self-esteem. They were mistrustful and resentful about not “getting enough”, always comparing themselves to those apparently better off. In their jealousy and envy, they over-reacted to irritations and inconveniences with sharp tempers. After all those years of growing, they still showed immaturity in their inability to delay gratification!

The capacity to impose a delay on ones impulses seems to be at the root of a whole range of personal virtues. Some children had learnt at four years of age a basic truth of life: self-discipline for a greater good, avoidance of temptation and immediate pleasure for the sake of something better.

Surprising also, when they were evaluated on finishing school, those who had waited patiently at four were far superior as students than the others. Although not more intelligent, they were competent academically and they scored higher in verbal skills, in sports and in planning abilities.

How children do on a delay of gratification test is actually a greater indicator of their future achievements than their IQ. Poor impulse control on the contrary was an indicator of probable later delinquency. The ability to delay gratification in turn contributes powerfully to intellectual potential. While IQ cannot be changed and so imposes a limitation on a persons potential, there is plenty of evidence that emotional shill such as impulse control can be learned. In fact what Walter Mischel called “goal-directed self-imposed delay of gratification” is perhaps the essence of emotional self-regulation. The ability to deny impulse in the service of a goal, whether it be building a business, gaining political election or pursuing a sports trophy depends more on emotional intelligence than IQ or chance.