Walter Mischel? One of the best-known studies in the history of psychology. In 1960, Mischel, then a professor at Stanford, making nursery-school students, put them one-by-one, and give them Treat (they can choose the cake, stick pretzels , or marshmallows) and the agreement as follows: They can eat GFPFE immediately, or wait 15 minutes until the experiment again. If they wait, they get an extra treat. Tracking children from time to time, Mischel found that the ability to live seem trivial exercise has very profound consequences. As they mature and become adults, children demonstrated the ability to wait for a better value, healthy, enjoy greater professional success, and proved to be better off staying in the relationship even decades after they took the test. They are, in short, both at work life.Mischel's been very influential, making its way into popular culture (most recently in this year's romantic comedy The Five-Year Engagement) in a way that only a few academic studies. It has changed the way teachers think about and Psychologist success: lessons is that it is not only the intelligence that is important, but self-control and patience and even tame the impulse from the desire to eat marshmallows that there is a desire to crack the exam or a new study affair.A (PDF), however, shows that we can do, fortunately, a comprehensive study of Mischel's work. Celeste Kidd, cognitive science graduate student at the University of Rochester, lead author on the paper. When he was young, Kidd spent some time working at a shelter for homeless families. He began to wonder how it is grown setting, full of change and uncertainty, can shape the way children respond to such situations Mischel studies presented. "Working there gave me some strong intuitions about what the kids in that situation would do, given the task of marshmallows," he said. "I'm pretty sure the kids will eat the marshmallow immediately." Not because they are weak-willed, but because very little in their care gave them plenty of reason to believe that adults do what they said they would. What is missing from the famous experiment Mischel, Kidd argues, trust.Kidd's own version of the marshmallow study designed to evaluate the effect of trust. First, the three to five-year-old researchers study primed to think of either as reliable or dependable. In the first part of the study, the researchers were handed a piece of paper and crayons bottles are used, and then said a child can use crayons or wait for a better set of art supplies . In the second part of the study, experiments give children small sticker and told the young subjects either more efficient to use a single or a large waiting, sticker. For half the children, the experiment will continue bargaining, returned with a tray-load marker, crayons, and colored pencils, some good sticker. For the other half, the experiment returned a few minutes later said, apologetically, that there's not even any art supplies are better or more efficient stickers.After it, the children were given a marshmallow test. The results were dramatic: nine out of 14 children in a reliable condition last 15 minutes for the second marshmallow, while only one in 14 in reliable condition. If children are not sure they will get a second marshmallow, they will not bother wait.As bend, Mischel himself has seen and played the role of faith confidence in the ability to delay giving satisfaction. Reached while traveling in Europe and asked about the new study, he responded by e-mail links to three papers early. One of them, from 1961, to see whether they are from fatherless households affect the willingness of the child to wait reward.But description Mischel's work has focused primarily on the determination and grit, and many charter schools and education researchers took heart marshmallows are likely to see the results self as the quality of unity that can explain both our children and our decision results adult. In the study of Kidd, willingness to wait rather a situation in nature. Rather than participate in the desperate struggle against their own taste, the young subjects of his study carefully calculate the likelihood that they will actually get a second marshmallow. His work shows that getting children better off waiting in the laboratory and in life is a matter of attracting them with something worth waiting for.