But the Marshmallow Test is a test! The child is told not to eat the marshmallow (maybe not in so many words), so there's an obvious correct answer to the test ("don't eat the marshmallow"), and some people are motivated to take that answer because they are motivated to do well when they are being tested. My own history is full of this kind of incident.
EDIT: to clarify, the Marshmallow Test is a test when viewed by someone who is always on the lookout for tests, like me and like some other children. Many children, I'm sure, would not view it as a test, and might correspondingly not pass it.
Again, you're still misinterpreting the word "test" in "Marshmallow Test". (Also keep in mind that "marshmallow test" isn't what the Stanford researchers called it.[1] The "Marshmallow Test" was only colloquial shorthand for behavioral experiments.)
When you use the phrases "correct", "do well", "pass", it means you're repeating the same mistake of applying your post-hoc reasoning of "test" to 4-year old brains.
Thinking that "waiting for 2 marshmallows" is the _correct_ answer is the wrong framework to use.
This is not a school test where "2+3" where "5" is correct and "8" is incorrect.
This is a psychological test where "test" means a contrived social apparatus to observe behavioral choices. This means that "choosing not to wait and immediately consume 1 marshmallow" is also the _correct_ answer.
The child is given a choice where he/she must weigh an uncertain future with a certain present desire. There is no right or wrong answer. There is no pass or fail. There are only choices and observations of those choices.
For example, one of the criticisms of the "Marshmallow Experiment" is that the researchers were actually measuring "trust & reliability of adults" vs "delayed gratification". In other words, the way we label the behavorial experiments will distort our view of what we think the "correct" answer is.
E.g. if Johnny was told in the past by his mother that if he stopped pulling his sister's hair in the car, he'd get a treat when they got home. However, his monther didn't followup on that promise. Therefore, when the researcher gives him a choice between 1 marshmallow now or 2 if he waited until later, it means the 4-year old's "optimization" of the uncertain future is to take the 1 marshmallow now. This is the "correct" answer for him.
I think you're misunderstanding The Desire To Pass Tests, and GP's point about it.
One choice of the Marshmallow Test results in a bigger number and one choice results in a smaller number. To a person with The Desire To Pass Tests, this is interpreted as equivalent to the score on a school test. In other words, the bigger number signals that one answer is correct, to someone who looks out for those signals.
This is not saying that the choice is correct, in an inherent sense, and I think that's what you're getting hung up on. The Marshmallow Test measures behavior choices and there's no objective correct answer, but those behavior choices may have a reason or a reasoning framework behind them. And that reasoning framework may be an already-instilled belief that given two options, one option is correct and it's important to choose that option. In other words, the behavioral choice is to treat the experiment as a school test and try to pass that test.
Reply to both Cogito and lmkg since they are similar counterpoints:
>Cogito: "maximum number of marshmallows"*
>lmkg: "the bigger number signals that one answer is correct,"
If the child doesn't trust or believe the researcher (a stranger), then in his mind, the 1 marshmallow is a bigger number than zero marshmallows promised later. Because "later" could translate to "never", and "2 marshmallows" could translate to "0 marshmallows".
Is it possible for a few, or some of the very young 4-year old children to meta-analyze the situation and conclude "you can't trick me, this is really a test!" ??
Sure, but Smaug123 contended that this reasoning process generalized to the test population.
If we want to entertain the fact that children want to "please" adults to "pass a test", we also have to accept that they can interpret the situation as "evaluating promises of future rewards being kept or broken" and rationally choose 1 marshmallow as the optimum decision. Choosing 1 now is also "passing a test" if we insist on framing it as a "test" in the vein of Hercules 12 labors. ("See mom, you told me to never trust strangers and so I got the 1 marshmallow right away.")
If we still want to hang on to the idea that 4-year olds keep reinterpreting life interactions as a "test to pass", a lot of frustrated parents are going to wonder... "why can't Johnny see that keeping to himself instead of pulling his sisters hair to get a piece of candy later is a TEST TO PASS?!? He just keeps misbehaving!" <-- If that situation is happening, it means overlaying observed behavior (both wanted & unwanted behaviors) with a framework of "desire to pass a test" is overestimating its explanatory power.
I don't think they are misinterpreting anything, just explaining their point in a way that looks like misinterpretation to you :D
Let me try another way.
1. Some children, of which I would have been an example, when sat down and told about the marshmallows will interpret this interaction as a test.
2. Believing that they are being tested, some of these children, of which I would also have been an example, will want to pass the test.
3. Based on previous experience, some of these children, of which I would have been an example, will believe that they pass the test if they get the maximum number of marshmallows.
To be fair, what I would have considered the correct answer may have depended on how exactly the scenario was described to me, but considering various options I think almost every time I would have thought waiting was the correct action - this is obviously through the lens of hindsight rationalisation so I have no way to support this idea.
All that aside, it appears that even if having some desire to pass tests makes a child more inclined to "pass" the Marshmallow Test, it doesn't provide any significant predictive power on the outcome that was measured when you also account for the socio-economic factors discussed in the article.
EDIT: to clarify, the Marshmallow Test is a test when viewed by someone who is always on the lookout for tests, like me and like some other children. Many children, I'm sure, would not view it as a test, and might correspondingly not pass it.