Why do people often behave in ways that are contrary to their best interests? Pepper & Nettle (P&N) ask this question while focusing on individuals of lower socioeconomic status (SES), who tend toward present-oriented behaviors that many would construe as maladaptive and indicative of poor self-control. P&N's answer is that this behavior does not result from a failure of willpower but instead originates from a rational, appropriate response to a lack of personal control: If people are less able to ensure they will receive future rewards, then it makes sense (logically and evolutionarily) to prioritize the present over the future in their behaviors.

We agree that contextual factors are important for understanding and addressing socioeconomic profiles of present-oriented behavior. Our work has highlighted the role of social norms and social trust: Children will delay gratification when they see that members of their own group do so (Doebel & Munakata Reference Doebel and Munakata2017), and children and adults prefer immediate rewards when they believe those controlling the rewards are untrustworthy (Michaelson et al. Reference Michaelson, de la Vega, Chatham and Munakata2013; Michaelson & Munakata Reference Michaelson and Munakata2016; see also Kidd et al. Reference Kidd, Palmeri and Aslin2013; Lee & Carlson Reference Lee and Carlson2015). We have thus argued that present-oriented behaviors cannot be understood solely in terms of self-control abilities (i.e., willpower).

However, a full understanding of the “behavioral constellation of deprivation” (BCD) cannot discount self-control abilities in the way that P&N's account does. First, the ability to engage self-control does influence whether individuals engage in present-oriented behavior. For example, children who have worse self-control abilities at age 5 are significantly more likely to begin smoking, perform poorly in school, and engage in antisocial behaviors at age 12 compared to their twin siblings with better self-control, who are matched on nearly every aspect of the family environment, including SES (Moffitt et al. Reference Moffitt, Arseneault, Belsky, Dickson, Hancox, Harrington, Houts, Poulton, Roberts, Ross, Sears, Thomson and Caspi2011). In addition, changes in self-control within an individual over time predict subsequent changes in academic achievement, but not vice versa (Duckworth et al. Reference Duckworth, Tsukayama and May2010). Moreover, some laboratory and classroom interventions suggest that short-term manipulations of self-control ability can influence present-oriented behavior (e.g., Bierman et al. Reference Bierman, Nix, Greenberg, Blair and Domitrovich2008; Klingberg et al. Reference Klingberg, Fernell, Olesen, Johnson, Gustafsson, Dahlström, Gillberg, Forssberg and Westerberg2005; Raver et al. Reference Raver, Jones, Li-Grining, Zhai, Bub and Pressler2011). Such findings from quasi-experimental and intervention studies highlight the importance of self-control abilities in avoiding the BCD. Personal control is not enough.

Second, contextual factors that influence willingness to engage in future-oriented behaviors may shape the development of self-control abilities, which in turn influence future-oriented behaviors. Thus, contrasting contextual factors with self-control may be a false dichotomy. For example, children from high-SES communities may experience many opportunities to practice self-control, due to such contextual factors as high personal control and social trust and the presence of social norms around self-control. Such experiences may themselves lead to greater abilities to control behavior and to neurocognitive substrates supporting self-control across the life span (Diamond Reference Diamond2012; Zelazo Reference Zelazo2015). Moreover, such experiences may in turn lead to reciprocal, cascading effects (Karmiloff-Smith Reference Karmiloff-Smith1998; Sameroff Reference Sameroff2009; Smith & Thelen Reference Smith and Thelen2003), whereby children who regularly practice self-control and see its benefits will increasingly value and use it. Thus, such experiences as these may substantially shape the development of self-control abilities. Such processes are consistent with the broader principles that P&N highlight regarding feedback loops that can amplify small initial disparities into large consequential ones. However, P&N focus on how such feedback loops can shape the willingness to engage in future-oriented behavior, whereas we highlight how such processes can also shape the ability to engage in such behavior.

Our account can provide insight into why childhood self-control predicts neural and behavioral indices of self-control in adulthood (Casey et al. Reference Casey, Somerville, Gotlib, Ayduk, Franklin, Askren, Jonides, Berman, Wilson, Teslovich, Glover, Zayas, Mischel and Shoda2011; Moffitt et al. Reference Moffitt, Arseneault, Belsky, Dickson, Hancox, Harrington, Houts, Poulton, Roberts, Ross, Sears, Thomson and Caspi2011), and developmental links between SES and neural and behavioral indices of self-control (e.g., Hackman et al. Reference Hackman, Gallop, Evans and Farah2015; Lawson et al. Reference Lawson, Duda, Avants, Wu and Farah2013; Noble et al. Reference Noble, Houston, Kan and Sowell2012). This account also suggests that targeted interventions that support early opportunities to practice self-control (e.g., by addressing social norms and trust that may support or inhibit self-control) can yield benefits. For example, children may be motivated to engage and practice self-control if they learn that self-control is valued in their community and leads to valued outcomes, and if they are provided with experiences of delayed rewards being delivered as promised. Considering learning processes and reciprocal, cascading effects in developing abilities to control behavior is essential for adequately addressing the complex ways in which contextual factors can shape the BCD.

Personal control and sociostructural inequalities clearly matter and are important targets. But concluding that self-control abilities do not matter is inaccurate and unnecessary. Self-control abilities influence present-oriented behaviors and may be one mechanism whereby small differences in present-oriented behavior get amplified into consequential ones. Thus, future work should address the processes that shape developing abilities to control behavior in the BCD and their distinct implications for intervention.