An article has been released that discusses the similarities and differences between animals and humans, focusing on how these factors relate to the winner and loser effects in people.
Studies indicate that in many animal species, those who win a confrontation are more likely to continue winning in future bouts, while those who lose often face further defeats. For example, when male stickleback fish were introduced to competitors at random, 65% of the victorious fish won again in their next match, while all the losing fish were unable to secure a win in the second round.
These winner and loser effects can significantly impact behavior and overall fitness. This phenomenon is also observed in humans. In the paper titled “Winner and Loser Effects and Social Rank in Humans,” recently published in The Quarterly Review of Biology, authors Noah M. T. Smith and Reuven Dukas present a narrative review that explores the relevant similarities and differences in winner and loser effects as they pertain to humans and nonhumans.
The authors examine the adaptive significance of winner and loser effects in animals like chimpanzees and fruit flies, while also considering other factors that influence social status in both animals and humans. The interactions between social status and the effects of winning and losing can change cognition and behavior across different contexts.
They further investigate how these winner and loser effects might influence social behaviors. In both nonhuman and human contexts, these effects can lead individuals to act according to their perceived social standing, with winners adopting dominant behaviors and losers displaying submissive traits. While physical strength primarily defines social ranking in nonhuman species, in adult humans, factors like social norms, physical appeal, proficiency in intricate skills, and social intelligence play a more substantial role in establishing social rank.
New research efforts have also looked at winner and loser effects in sports among humans. Smith and Dukas explored these effects through first-person shooter video games and reading comprehension tests. Participants assigned at random as winners in video games generally performed better in follow-up tasks compared to those assigned as losers, and top scorers in the initial game showed higher reading comprehension scores in subsequent testing than those who scored lower.
The authors emphasize that “our experimental setup, featuring random participant assignment to winner and loser categories, is essential to eliminate any selection bias, which could lead to the better performers simply winning against less skilled opponents repeatedly.”
Further research could delve into how and why winner and loser effects influence human thought processes, emotional states, and behaviors. These findings could have far-reaching implications in various fields, including “red shirting” (the practice of delaying children’s school entry), the influence of these effects in fields like investment banking and gambling, and the emotional impacts of winning and losing.
