Marshmallow Test Revisited: Broken Promises, Brain Scans and Overcontrol

Got something to say to this podcast? Send a voicemail, and you might hear yourself on the next episode!

Walter Mischel's Stanford experiments in the 1960s and 1970s left four-year-olds alone with one marshmallow and a bell: ring and eat it now, or wait about 15 minutes for two. Follow-ups found that high delayers later had higher SAT scores, coped better with stress, and as adults had lower divorce rates, fewer addiction problems and lower BMI. Replications in 2018, 2020 and 2024, with more diverse children and in one case a sample over ten times larger, found about half the original effect, with economic background explaining much of the rest. The episode explains the cognitive affective personality system: hot processing fixes on the treat's sweetness, while cool processing turns it into a cotton ball or cloud, and the successful children covered their eyes, sang or hid under the desk.

B. J. Casey at Cornell scanned 59 original participants in their mid-40s with fMRI on a task requiring them to suppress responses to happy faces. Former high delayers showed more activity in the right prefrontal cortex, low delayers more in the ventral striatum. Trust also matters: children who were promised better art supplies and then let down waited an average of three minutes in the marshmallow test, against 12 minutes for children whose promise was kept. David Funder and Jack Block described ego overcontrol, and Funder found teenagers who delayed payment most seemed almost unable to stop, calling delayed gratification a mixed bag.

• Toddlers whose mothers were responsive during stressful moments were better at delaying gratification as preschoolers.
• A token economy in a South Wales classroom cut attention-seeking by three girls during private study.
• Continuous verbal activity while waiting increased delay tolerance in participants with ADHD.
• A 2001 temporal discounting study found that at delays of 15 to 25 years, the size of the reward stopped mattering.
• Insect-eating tamarins travel far but wait little, while sap-eating marmosets wait longer but travel less.