The Rub

Shortly after teaching a class on the marshmallow experiment, I heard back from the American Psychological Association (APA) about my children's book on the subject. Unfortunately, the APA did not accept Cookie-Wise Pablo for publication. Among other reasons for rejection, the APA cited new research on the experiment.

Findings from the new research are interesting. First, they ran the experiment differently. Before the experiment even began the kids had an encounter with an adult. One adult offered to bring the kid art supplies and flaked on the promise. The other adult came through on the promise.

According to the experimenters' abstract, here is what they found:

Children in the reliable condition waited significantly longer than those in the unreliable condition (p < 0.0005), suggesting that children’s wait-times reflected reasoned beliefs about whether waiting would ultimately pay off. Thus, wait-times on sustained delay-of-gratification tasks (e.g., the marshmallow task) may not only reflect differences in self-control abilities, but also beliefs about the stability of the world.

Fascinating stuff that totally makes sense, right?

To a certain extent, yes. But there are holes or, at least, questions remaining.

It makes sense that this may not wholly be a question of nature or nurture. After all, how often does that happen? It makes sense that the answer may be a combination of the two.

It also makes sense that children in the reliable condition waited significantly longer for the second marshmallow. They just had a reliable encounter and may, in general, have more reliable encounters than unreliable ones. But some children in the reliable condition still did not make it to the second marshmallow. Why? Maybe because they, in general, have more unreliable encounters than reliable ones making a reliable one an aberration.

Or, maybe the kids in the reliable condition that did not make it to the second marshmallow do not have the skills or good habits to successfully delay gratification. These kids can benefit from a book where the protagonist builds these skills and habits.

And what about the kids in the unreliable condition? Are they right to eat the first marshmallow immediately? When the person offering the marshmallow is unreliable, yes. But what about when the person is reliable? If the person is reliable and the kids eat the first marshmallow they have just lost out on a second. In this case the kid who had the unreliable experience is performing a knee-jerk reaction and is not weighing the new offer on the substantiated merits of the person making the offer (unless the person who flaked earlier and the person who offered them the marshmallow are one and the same).

As my prior research has shown, the cities in the U.S. with the highest average credit scores are those in the upper-midwest (Wausau, WI, Minneapolis, MN, Madison, WI, Cedar Rapids, IA). Areas with low incarceration rates and knowledge handed down over generations among people with good habits. In other words, these are the kids who have reliable encounters and who believe they will be rewarded for waiting for the second marshmallow.

Cities in the U.S. with the lowest average credit scores are found in south Texas (Harlingen, Corpus Christi), Mississippi (Jackson) and Louisiana (Shreveport, Monroe) and are, in general, minority-majority communities. Cities with higher rates of incarceration that make it difficult to hand down knowledge from one generation to the next. In other words, these are the kids who have unreliable encounters and who do not wait for the second marshmallow because they do not believe it will ever come. I don't blame these kids for eating the first marshmallow, but there's more to the story.

Not trusting one's father or neighbor is one thing. Not trusting (bear with me on this one) the rule of law and its ability to safeguard consumers from merchants is something else. Then again, as a minority why should you trust the rule of law if it only persists in putting you in jail? Or if, as is well-documented, the law is not equitably executed and you are taken advantage of by banks and their egregious lending rates to minorities? And there's the rub.

As I've learned capitalism is based on trust. If there is no trust, there is no trade as consumers doubt the products merchants sell and merchants doubt consumers' ability to pay. Part of establishing trust is a properly functioning rule of law that protects consumers and merchants. Without an equitable execution of that rule of law, trust breaks down among those who find themselves on the short end, in this case, those who have more unreliable encounters than reliable ones.

For as much as I believe in a book's ability to fill knowledge gaps left by broken families and unreliable individuals or communities, it would be disingenuous of me to portray a minority waiting for a second marshmallow when that does not line up with their reality.

Back to the drawing board.