Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

Igel

(35,300 posts)
14. While The Atlantic seemed to suggest this
Sat Jun 2, 2018, 08:57 AM
Jun 2018

was a research finding, the original study this was all based on was from the '60s. '68 I think, without rummaging. Not sure about the age of the kids involved.

It claimed "delayed self-gratification = academic achievement later in life".

It was within a year or two that a counter-claim was advanced, so by '70 or perhaps before--that rule-stability and predictability was what was at play. If you suspect that the person saying the second cookie was going to make the second cookie available, you'd wait. Cookie now vs 2 cookies in 15 minutes.

If you had been told that there are no reliable rules but things can shift under your feet at any time, then the future value of holding off on that first cookie is pretty small. The options are then one cookie now versus a very good chance of no cookies later.

I don't know of anybody that's advanced the claim that the *sole* factor is delayed self-gratification. If that's really in the article, it's either a straw man out of ignorance or to inflate the importance of the work.

Now, that there is *no* effect would be a contribution.

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»Why Rich Kids Are So Good...»Reply #14