The Marshmallow Test Grows Up
October 16, 2012
New research has made the famous
1972 marshmallow test
even more compelling. The original Stanford University study on delayed gratification, which promised children an extra marshmallow if they could resist the one in front of them for 15 minutes, analyzed whether a child’s ability to delay gratification had any correlation on future success. Today, researchers have taken that
information a step farther
– finding that a child’s ability to resist temptation isn’t innate, but highly influenced by environment.
Researchers from the University of Rochester gave
five-year-olds used crayons
and one sticker to decorate a piece of paper. One group of children was told they would receive a new set of art supplies, but never received it. For the second group, however, researchers made good on their promise and provided the children with new crayons and better stickers. Both groups were then given the
The children who were promised the supplies and never received them waited an average of three minutes before eating their marshmallows. The children who had received the supplies promised resisted temptation for an average of 12 minutes, leading researchers to believe that experience plays into a child’s ability to delay gratification. Wait times reflected not just the child’s self-control abilities, but suggest a child’s reasoning of the stability of the world around them and their understanding of whether waiting to delay gratification would ultimately pay off. According to researcher Celeste Kidd, delaying gratification is only a rational choice if the child believes that the second marshmallow is likely to appear. Though children do not monitor every single action of the adults around them, they do have an overall sense of the reliability or unreliability of the people around them.
The group found that children may have more sophisticated decision-making abilities based on their environments than originally thought.
Share this post:
Could a Blood Test Diagnose Major Depression in Teens?
Researchers at Northwestern University Medical School have suggested that depression in teens could be diagnosed with a simple blood test. Their study, published in the April 17, 2012 issue of Translational Psychiatry, identifies 11 biomarkers for early-onset major depressive disorder—one of the most common yet debilitating mental illnesses among young people. If the results are confirmed in larger populations, diagnosis could become a much simpler process, and one that might help teens avoid some of the stigma currently associated with a depression diagnosis. Early-onset major depressive disorder is a serious mental illness that affects mainly teenagers and young adults. Although 2 to 4% of cases are diagnosed before adolescence, the numbers increase dramatically to 10-25% with adolescence, according to lead researcher Eva Redei, professor of psychiatry and behavioral sciences at the Northwestern University Feinberg School of Medicine. “Not diagnosed, depression affects how teens relate to others. The No. 1 cause of death among the depressed is suicide,” explained Redei in a recent interview with CNN. “If teens are depressed and not treated, there can be drug abuse, dropping out of ...
Polygraph Tests: How Accurate Are They?
Lying, it seems, is a very common part of human interaction. In their book 50 Great Myths of Popular Psychology (2010), Scott Lilienfeld and his colleagues cite studies in which college students and others in the community admit to lying once or twice a day, on average. But how hard is it to tell if someone is lying? Don’t liars give off tell-tale signs of their deceptions? In fact, research reveals surprisingly few valid cues of deception, and Lilienfeld asserts that “most of us are dead wrong about bodily cues that give away liars” (p. 116). If people are poor judges of truthfulness in others, does technology offer a better solution? Is the polygraph, or lie-detector test, an accurate means of detecting dishonesty? Most Americans (67% in one study) believe that lie-detector tests are “reliable” or “useful,” and films and television programs tend to corroborate this belief with story lines that portray polygraph testing as infallible. The science, however, tells a different story. Lilienfeld and his colleagues explain that rather than truthfulness, the polygraph machine simply measures physiological activity—and then it ...
Now available: The Young Children’s Achievement Test–Second Edition (YCAT-2)
If you’re looking for a test to identify young children who may be at risk for school failure, look to the new YCAT-2. This latest update yields an overall Early Achievement score as well as individual subtest scores for General Information, Mathematics, Reading, Writing, and Spoken Language. Each of the subtests can be administered independently and all can be transformed to standard scores, percentiles, and age equivalents. The YCAT-2 was normed on a representative sample of 846 children representing 25 states and 226 different ZIP codes. Reliability was studied using coefficient alpha, test–retest, and interscorer procedures. The average coefficient alpha for the full normative sample ranges from .85 to .95 for the subtests and is .97 for the overall composite. The YCAT-2 provides extensive validity evidence for content-description validity, criterion-prediction validity, and construct-identification validity. Visit our YCAT-2 product page for additional information or to order the YCAT-2 today!
The RAIT vs. the TOGRA: Choosing the Right Intelligence Test
Earlier this year, PAR was pleased to announce the publication of two new tests of intelligence and reasoning ability by Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD—the Reynolds Adaptable Intelligence Test™ (RAIT™) and the Test of General Reasoning Ability™ (TOGRA™). But what are the differences between these two new measures? In simple terms, the difference can be summed up as “power versus speed.” The RAIT is a powerful, comprehensive measure that assesses crystalized intelligence, fluid intelligence, and quantitative aptitude/intelligence. Designed to help educators evaluate students’ aptitude and determine eligibility for state and federal disability programs, the RAIT can also help clinicians diagnose various forms of childhood psychopathology and evaluate intelligence as part of general and neuropsychological evaluation. The RAIT takes approximately 50 minutes to administer. The TOGRA is a speeded measure of reasoning and problem-solving. It helps human resources personnel quickly evaluate a job candidate’s abilities; it can also be used to evaluate athletes pre- and post-injury. With two equivalent, alternate forms, re-testing and progress monitoring can be done easily, without practice effects. The TOGRA takes only 16 minutes to administer. Of course, the RAIT and ...
A current test of complex processing speed: Introducing the RIT
The latest test from popular author Cecil R. Reynolds, PhD, the new Reynolds Interference Task (RIT) is a test of complex processing speed that assesses general neuropsychological integrity. It is suitable for measuring the effects of traumatic brain injury, stroke, dementia, Alzheimer’s disease, and brain tumors. It is also useful as a measure of attention and complex processing speed deficits and as a rapid means of measuring recovery from concussion. Measurement of speeded processing is popular in psychological testing, and most measures are exceedingly simple. Measuring how quickly one can perform simple tasks that, given unlimited time, almost everyone would complete perfectly is a reflection of speeded processing. The RIT adds a layer of cognitive processing difficulty—inhibition and attention-shifting—to simple tasks, which slows performance and requires extra mental effort, making the tasks more complex and thus more indicative of cognitive flexibility and selective attention. The RIT features two timed Stroop-style subtests, Object Interference and Color Interference, which combine to provide a Total Score. This provides greater coverage, enhanced consistency, and more reliability than similar measures featuring a single subtest. It was ...
Community Partners Contest Winners
Recently PAR held a contest and asked its Customers to describe, in 300 words or less, their involvement in their favorite local charities. The winners are listed below and will receive cash donations in their names to the charities they submitted and support - $500 for the first place winner, $350 for second place winner, and $250 for the third place winner. The winner of the PAR Community PARtners contest is Robert Mintz from Short Hills, NJ. Robert nominated a charity called Down The Block (http://www.downtheblock.org) that provides assistance to local residents who find themselves in financial distress. Robert described the charity as a “hyper-local” non-profit organization located in Millburn Township, NJ that focuses on assisting those who are not eligible for traditional support. The second place winner is Shaun Keel who nominated Foster A Life (http://www.fosteralife.com). The organization’s mission is to provide services and opportunities to foster children to promote a more positive self-image and an increase in their self-esteem. They are a 100% volunteer organization, so all funding goes directly to the children. The third place winner is Judith Mathewson ...
About PAR (60)
Community PARtners (24)
Meet the Author (23)
New Products (80)
PAR Author (63)
PAR Staff (37)
Sometimes a screener is just what you need
ASCA: On the way to LA!
Now available: Two trauma screening forms for children!
Development of a novel approach to assessing reading comprehension
PAR exhibits at two conferences this week!
Read More »
career interest inventory
post-traumatic stress disorder