The original marshmallow test studied whether and how children distracted themselves to avoid eating a marshmallow in hopes of getting two later on. doble.d/Getty Images
Ever seen images of preschoolers staring longingly at a single marshmallow? Chances are, you caught a glimpse of the so-called marshmallow test. Conducted about 50 years ago, the experiment was designed to examine preschoolers ability to delay gratification when presented with a choice of having one marshmallow now or waiting a period of time and having two marshmallows later.
The marshmallow test was more than just amusing video footage. Researchers later suggested that passing it could be an early indicator of a child s future success in school, occupation and even life in general. Those findings have come under scrutiny in recent years, but the study remains one of the most beloved pieces of social-science research.
The researchers also say it occurs more often when the monkeys are uncertain about the outcome.
“We’re predisposed to keep trying. And when we find ourselves sticking with things, we should also be a little reflective. Do I have a good reason to keep trying?”
In humans, this is called the “sunk costs” phenomenon, where the more resources we sink into an endeavor, the likelier we are to continue even if we sense it’s futile.
But why would we engage in such potentially self-defeating behavior?
The researchers think two factors may play a role. First, it may be a deep, evolutionarily ancient mechanism that helps us balance overall cost and benefit. Second, it may be influenced by uncertainty about the outcome (you never know, it might work out, so why not keep trying?)
To the bitter end: primates can also fall into the sunken cost fallacy
Giving up is how you win, sometimes.
People are notorious for not wanting to waste our time and effort to the point that we’re willing to sink more of both into an endeavor we’re already on even if it is obviously futile. Our primate relatives seem to be the same.
Image credits Dimitri Houtteman.
Our reluctance to give something up after we’ve worked hard to get it, or otherwise invested a lot of time of effort in, is known as the “sunken cost” fallacy. In essence, the more effort you’ve put into something, the likelier you are to keep working on it even if you know it’s for naught.
Monkeys, like humans, persist at tasks they ve already invested in
If you ve ever stayed in a relationship too long or stuck with a project that was going nowhere, you re not alone. Humans are generally reluctant to give up on something they ve already committed time and effort to. It s called the sunk costs phenomenon, where the more resources we sink into an endeavor, the likelier we are to continue even if we sense it s futile.
But why would we engage in such potentially self-defeating behavior?
Georgia State researchers think two factors may play a role. First, it may be a deep, evolutionarily ancient mechanism that helps us balance overall cost and benefit. Second, it may be influenced by uncertainty about the outcome (you never know, it might work out, so why not keep trying?)
Monkeys, like humans, persist at tasks they ve already invested in—even when they don t succeed phys.org - get the latest breaking news, showbiz & celebrity photos, sport news & rumours, viral videos and top stories from phys.org Daily Mail and Mail on Sunday newspapers.