Races differ in self-control, and this could help explain some disparities.

Self-control is the ability to control oneself, whether it be emotions or desires. It also includes the ability to control your behavior. Much like any other trait, there are racial differences in self-control which could help explain racial disparities.

Self-Control and Life Outcomes

Self-control is measured simply by offering a participant an immediate reward or a better delayed award. The most famous one of these is the marshmallow study; children are left in a room with a marshmallow and are observed in secret to see if they eat it or not. If they don’t, they are given a reward after the study ends. Of course, though, not all self-control studies require marshmallows and others use money.

It has been shown that the inability or unwillingness to delay self-gratification affects many life outcomes. Using nationally representative samples, Moffit et al. (2012) looked at how well self-control measured in childhood predicted life outcomes at age 32 compared to IQ and parental socioeconomic status. Self-control was found to predict better health, more wealth, less criminality, and a lower chance of being a single parent. This held true even while IQ and parental socioeconomic status was held constant. Although, Moffit et al. found IQ to be a better predictor of wealth and adult socioeconomic status when self-control and parental socioeconomic status were held constant. Daley et al. (2015) looked at 16,780 British individuals and looked at how well IQ, childhood self-control, and class predicted adult unemployment. IQ and self-control both had a negative relationship with unemployment, and class failed to predict unemployment after IQ and self-control were controlled for.

Tangey, Baumeister, and Boone (2004) found that high self-control predicted a higher GPA, better social adjustment, less binge-eating and alcohol abuse, better relationships and interpersonal skills, secure attachment, and better emotional responses. This remained even after controlling for social desirability bias. Casey et al. (2011) looked at 60 individuals and remarked that those who showed lower self-control in preschool also showed lower self-control in their 20s and 30s. In a meta-analysis by Ridder et al. (2011), self-control was related to a variety of human behaviors like love, happiness, getting good grades, speeding, commitment in a relationship and lifetime delinquency. There was a small-medium relationship between self-control and outcomes, showing that self-control may not explain all of these traits but it is a factor.

Race Differences in Self-Control

In a classic series of studies, Mischel (1958, 1961a, 1961b) found that black Trinidadian children given a choice between getting a smaller candy bar now or a larger one in a week tended, much more than matched white children, to choose the smaller, immediate candy bar. The difference between white and black children “so great as to make tests for the significance of the difference superfluous” (Mischel 1961a). Mischel reported undertaking the study because informants had suggested that “Negroes are impulsive, indulge themselves, settle for next to nothing if they can get it right away, do not work or wait for bigger things in the future.” Seagull (1966) looked at black and white 9 year olds who lived in New York City. Blacks and whites were offered the choice between being given a small candy bar now, or a larger one in a week’s time. Black children were more likely to ask for the smaller candy bar now than white children.

Herzberger and Dweck (1978) looked at a sample of 100 4th graders and asked them to rate prizes. After rating the prizes, the researcher showed the immediate prizes and and the delayed one. Per the study, “the choice pairs included: three nickels, two versus five nickels, two versus three nickels, a small candy bar versus a medium-sized candy bar, and a rubber ball versus an iron-on patch (the latter was inscribed with either ‘keep on truckin” or ‘try it—you’ll like it’).” Black children had lower self-control than white children even after controlling for socioeconomic status. Not all studies used candy, though.

In the mid 1990s, the U.S. government offered military personal two options for when they retired: A large lump sum of money now (immediate reward) or a yearly payment (delayed reward) which, overtime, will be more than the immediate lump sum of money. Warner and Pleeter (2001) looked at the data for 66,483 individuals and found that blacks were 15% more likely than non-blacks to take the immediate reward. Whites were .4% less likely than non-whites to take the immediate reward. Zytkoskee, Strickland, and Watson (1971) and Price-Williams and Ramirez (1974) featured Mexicans, whites and blacks. The choices varied slightly and consisted of the option of $10 now or $30 in a month;s time, a 5 cents candy bar now or a 25 cents candy bar in a month’s time. There was little difference between the Mexicans and blacks, both of whom preferred the immediate reward — white children preferred the delayed reward at a higher rate.

Waney, Rieger, and Hens (2011) looked at 5,291 university students from 45 countries and gave participants the choice between an immediate monetary reward or a larger long-term reward. Africans had the lowest self-control and Germanic Nordics had the highest. The chart below demonstrates the order:

Castillo et al. (2011) had 82% of the student population of 4 middle schools in a poor Georgia school district. Subjects were asked if they want $49 now, or $49 + $x seven months from now. The x variable was positive and increased over time, so it would’ve been a lot of money. Black children had significantly lower control than white children. Andreoni et al. (2017) examined a total of 1,265 children who were asked if they wanted an immediate reward at the end of the day, or a larger reward the next day. The child’s race was significantly related to their level of patience and black children had lower levels of self-control than the white and Hispanic children. These differences weren’t explained by early assignment to school or parent preferences.

This attitude towards rewards can be described in a variety of ways: more rapid decay of reinforcement, unwillingness or inability to defer gratification, “extreme present-orientation” (Banfield 1974), impulsiveness, lower superego-dominance. In more crude terms, blacks are more impulsive than whites. Race differences in self-control matter since they could explain a variety of racial disparities

For example, Banfield argues that the primary cause of black poverty is because the lower class person lives from moment to moment– they are unable or unwilling to take account of the future or to control their impulses (as shown above, poor whites have higher self-control). Herrenstein and Wilson (1985) reported that poor blacks wanted to make a lot of money, but they left jobs if they were low paying while, ironically, saying that the work game is strong. W.J. Wilson also reported how blacks told ethnographers that their black unemployed friends were lazy; one person said that “many black males don’t want to work, and when I say don’t want to work, I say don’t want to work hard. They want a real easy job, making big bucks” (Wilson 1997). Lower self-control among blacks could partially explain why blacks are poorer than whites. Race differences in self-control can also help explain why blacks commit more crimes in the U.S. and all over the world (see Beaver, Ellis, and Wright 2009).

Although risk-taking is sometimes beneficial, races engage in difference risks. Blacks are more likely to take risky behavior such as smoking, not wearing a seat belt, and not engaging in proper hygiene (Hersch 1996; CDC; Lynn 2019).

Race differences in self-control levels can also be moderately explained by genetics, especially since self-control is under some genetic influence. Beaver et al. (2008) found that the heritability of self-control lies at .56; Anokhin et al. (2011, 2015) found it to be at .30 at age 12, .51  at age 14, and .55 at ages 16 and 18; Isen et al. (2014) found it to be at .47. Recently, Willems et al. (2019) conducted a meta-analysis and found the heritability of self control to be .6. In conclusion, half of self-control can be explained by genes and races differ in self-control for genetic reasons and environmental reasons.