Originally Posted by aeh
Originally Posted by Bostonian
Originally Posted by polarbear
Isn't executive function somewhat absent by default in 4 year olds?
It is lower on average than in older children and adults, but differences in self-control in 4-year-olds on the Marshmallow Test predicted later outcomes. Walter Mischel has a recent book The Marshmallow Test: Mastering Self-Control (2014).

http://www.apa.org/monitor/2014/12/marshmallow-test.aspx
Quote
In a series of studies that began in the late 1960s and continue today, psychologist Walter Mischel, PhD, found that children who, as 4-year-olds, could resist a tempting marshmallow placed in front of them, and instead hold out for a larger reward in the future (two marshmallows), became adults who were more likely to finish college and earn higher incomes, and were less likely to become overweight.
So what's the lesson to take from this? It's not that the marshmallow test is destiny and that preschoolers who fail it are doomed, Mischel says. Instead, the good news is that the strategies the successful preschoolers used can be taught to people of all ages. By harnessing the power of executive function and self-control strategies, we can all improve our ability to achieve our goals.

I wonder how to reconcile these assertions with the paper I cited finding that differences in executive function are genetic.

I thought the book Willpower: Rediscovering the Greatest Human Strength (2012) by Roy F. Baumeister and John Tierney was good.

And what's even more interesting is follow-ups that have been done with the marshmallow test that find that adults can influence child behavior/impulse control on the marshmallow test with their own behavior. One factor is the reliability of the adult's behavior/promises. In one variant, the adult makes a promise to the child ("I have a big box of art materials that you can use"), and keeps it, while in the alternate condition, the adult breaks the promise ("I'm sorry, it looks like someone borrowed my art box, but you can have these four crayons, instead."). Those children who experienced the reliable adult were able to hold out significantly longer than the children who were disappointed.

These findings are interpreted as meaning that children who experience the world (that is, adult caregivers) as reliable and predictable can afford to delay gratification, while those in unpredictable environments must take what they can, while they can.


I have always thought that test said more about the child's life than anything else. if the child has experienced frequent broken promises or food shortages then eating the marshmallow now is just applying 'a bird in the hand is worth two in the bush'. And kids from unsettled (or downright abusive) and impoverished homes tend to do less well academically and career wise.