New Issue: Science’s Impossible Questions. Read Now

Discipline Pays

Join Our Community of Science Lovers!

Any teacher can tell you that smarts alone do not a good student make. But psychologists had never rigorously studied the connection between self-discipline and academic success, says former teacher Angela L. Duckworth, now a psychology graduate student at the University of Pennsylvania. Duckworth and her adviser, Martin E. P. Seligman, gave 300 eighth graders, their teachers and their parents a questionnaire about the students’ ability to control impulses and follow rules. They also gave the children another questionnaire and behavioral test to assess their willingness to delay gratification. The reported self-discipline predicted final grades, school attendance and work habits better than IQ did. Moreover, the stronger the discipline, the better the outcomes.

The results could encourage young students to toe the line. Still, the research method may not be practical for routinely evaluating children, Duckworth says. “The effort that’s involved in a study like this is kind of humongous.”

[break] FLASH


On supporting science journalism

If you're enjoying this article, consider supporting our award-winning journalism by subscribing. By purchasing a subscription you are helping to ensure the future of impactful stories about the discoveries and ideas shaping our world today.


  • Fish is brain food. Although many dietary wives' tales have no basis in science, this one apparently holds up. Recent studies show that six-month-old babies whose mothers ate more fish during their second trimester of pregnancy score higher on cognitive tests, and senior citizens who eat fish at least once a week do better on memory and mental acuity exams than peers who do not.

  • The widower effect is strikingly real, according to a massive study released in February by Harvard Medical School and the University of Pennsylvania. For nine years, researchers followed more than 518,000 couples older than 65. The death of a wife in the previous 30 days increased a husband's risk of death by 53 percent, and the death of a husband increased a wife's risk of death by 61 percent. Additionally, the hospitalization of one partner elevated health risks for the other partner for nearly two years.

  • Bartenders, as well as drinkers at home, unintentionally pour 20 to 30 percent more liquor into short, wide glasses than tall, slender ones when making a mixed drink. Economics professor Brian Wansink of Cornell University explains that people perceive tall glasses as holding more than short ones of the same volume—an optical illusion. They also focus on the level of the liquid, insufficiently compensating for its diameter and thus the total volume.

JR Minkel was a news reporter for Scientific American.

More by JR Minkel
SA Mind Vol 17 Issue 2This article was published with the title “Discipline Pays” in SA Mind Vol. 17 No. 2 (), p. 9
doi:10.1038/scientificamericanmind0406-9b

Subscribe to Support Independent Journalism

Great science journalism requires human expertise, time, effort and creativity. And it costs money. That’s why I and the journalists here at Scientific American hope you’ll join our community.

When you subscribe, you are supporting staff and freelance journalists who are passionate about telling science stories that are true, important and compelling. Our editors and reporters are often experts in their fields, which means they understand the nuances of big discoveries and can untangle the breakthroughs from the hype. With a subscription, you are also supporting rigorous fact-checking to ensure the words we publish are precise and accurate. And you’re supporting original illustrations, graphics and photos that bring you closer to an advanced laboratory, an ice sheet in Antarctica or a space mission in orbit. You’re helping us craft other types of high-quality journalism as well: Our newsletters are carefully written, edited and curated by staffers you have or will come to know and love. Our Science Quickly podcast is based on original reporting, collaboration with editors and scientists and exacting production.

Subscriptions keep this engine running so we can continue to deliver thoughtful, rigorous and independent science journalism to you. In an era of viral misinformation, this work is crucial. If you value what we do, I hope you’ll consider joining us as a subscriber

Thank you,

Jeanna Bryner, Editor in Chief, Scientific American

Subscribe