In the late 1960s Walter Mischel conducted an experiment in which he took 4 year old children and put a marshmallow on a plate in front of them. If the child could resist eating the marshmallow, he was promised them two instead of one. He left the room and the children were observed and timed as to how long they waited before eating the marshmallow. The examiners analyzed how long each child resisted the temptation of eating the marshmallow, and whether or not doing so had an effect on their future success. The results showed some fascinating findings including how some of the children could wait the entire time he was gone (10–15 minutes). It demonstrated that the amount of time a child could wait was an almost direct predictor of future academic and personal success (Higgins, 2012).
Fourteen years later Mischel found that the "grabbers" suffered low self-esteem and were viewed by others as stubborn, prone to envy, and easily frustrated. The "waiters" had better coping skills, were more socially competent, self-assertive, trustworthy, dependable, academically successful. In conclusion, the ability to delay gratification through self-discipline was a better predictor of future success than any other measurement (Higgins, 2012).
Follow-up studies
The first follow-up study, in 1988, showed that "preschool children who delayed gratification longer in the self-imposed delay paradigm, were described more than 10 years later by their parents as adolescents who were significantly more competent". A second follow-up study, in 1990, showed that the ability to delay gratification produced higher SAT scores. A 2011 study of the same participants indicates that the characteristic remains with the person for life.
A 2006 paper to which Mischel contributed, reports a similar experiment, this time using cookies and a computer-controlled go/no-go test. From the study "the present findings suggest that an effective attentional control system, as reflected in preschoolers’ ability to direct attention away from tempting aspects of the rewards in a delay-of-gratification task, may share a common mechanism with, or serve as a precursor for, long-term ability to inhibit attentional and behavioral responses, as reflected years later in performance on the go/no-go task. Moreover, because inefficient performance in the go/no-go task has been well documented as being associated with immature development of fronto-striatal and related circuitry, the findings suggest that temptation focus in the delay-of-gratification task at age 4 may already be a marker of the subsequent development of individual differences in this system in adolescence and adulthood."(Eigsti, Zayas, Mischel, Shoda, Ayduk, Dadlani, Davidson, Aber, & Casey, 2006 as cited in Ormrod 2009, Child Development and Education ).
Fourteen years later Mischel found that the "grabbers" suffered low self-esteem and were viewed by others as stubborn, prone to envy, and easily frustrated. The "waiters" had better coping skills, were more socially competent, self-assertive, trustworthy, dependable, academically successful. In conclusion, the ability to delay gratification through self-discipline was a better predictor of future success than any other measurement (Higgins, 2012).
Follow-up studies
The first follow-up study, in 1988, showed that "preschool children who delayed gratification longer in the self-imposed delay paradigm, were described more than 10 years later by their parents as adolescents who were significantly more competent". A second follow-up study, in 1990, showed that the ability to delay gratification produced higher SAT scores. A 2011 study of the same participants indicates that the characteristic remains with the person for life.A 2006 paper to which Mischel contributed, reports a similar experiment, this time using cookies and a computer-controlled go/no-go test. From the study "the present findings suggest that an effective attentional control system, as reflected in preschoolers’ ability to direct attention away from tempting aspects of the rewards in a delay-of-gratification task, may share a common mechanism with, or serve as a precursor for, long-term ability to inhibit attentional and behavioral responses, as reflected years later in performance on the go/no-go task. Moreover, because inefficient performance in the go/no-go task has been well documented as being associated with immature development of fronto-striatal and related circuitry, the findings suggest that temptation focus in the delay-of-gratification task at age 4 may already be a marker of the subsequent development of individual differences in this system in adolescence and adulthood."(Eigsti, Zayas, Mischel, Shoda, Ayduk, Dadlani, Davidson, Aber, & Casey, 2006 as cited in Ormrod 2009, Child Development and Education ).