A fun (?) fact about the #marshmallow test.
When later researchers repeated the study, it was found that what mediated children's ability to wait was not "self-control" but rather their trust in the facilitator.
If they thought the facilitator was trustworthy, they waited. If not, they did not.
@_L1vY_ A lot of these studies that became staples of Psyc 101 class syllabi in the 1990s-2010s have elements of "but they later found out..." that never got corrected in the mass consciousness.
The famous Rosenhan experiment, for example, may have had major elements that were made up.
The Satir-Story was my own research, years ago. The oldest source of the change mgmt curve (or the house of change) was a book by Virginia Satir and Gerald Weinberg, referring to a book by Satir where she introduced the change curve based on the KR-Curve.
Will have to dive into my archive for the title…
@_L1vY_ wishing there was some correction like this for Millgram’s research on obedience to authority but … yeah the IRB wouldn’t allow a repeat study (and for good reason)
"The replication suggested that economic background, rather than willpower, explained the other half.[6][7] The predictive power of the marshmallow test was challenged in a 2020 study.[8][9]"
"A 2012 study at the University of Rochester (with a smaller N= 28) altered the experiment by dividing children into two groups: one group was given a broken promise before the marshmallow test was conducted (the unreliable tester group), and the second group had a fulfilled promise before their marshmallow test (the reliable tester group). The reliable tester group waited up to four times longer (12 min) than the unreliable tester group for the second marshmallow to appear.[18][19]"
One with cultural differences between Japanese kids and American kids with wrapped gifts and marshmallows. American kids hold out longer for wrapped gifts than Japanese kids who held out better on marshmallows.
Add comment