After sports #competitions, men engage in friendly touching longer than women
As the 2016 #Olympic Games in #Rio get under way, it’s interesting to watch the body language of rival athletes from around the world responding to one another in the heat of the moment following “the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.”
Do you believe that male athletes are typically more aggressive and cut-throat competitors than female athletes before, during, and after a sporting match? Interestingly, the latest research by evolutionary psychologists at Harvard University suggests that male athletes are actually more affectionate with one another after a fierce competition than their female counterparts.
The world of sports is, in many ways, a modern-day arena to play out primal same-sex conflicts. The Harvard researchers found that men are more likely than women to make peace with their competitors after the match is over. In fact, male winners and losers touched one another for longer and more affectionately after a sporting competition than female athletes.
Why Are Men More Reconciliatory Than Women After a Fierce Competition?
In the animal kingdom, previous studies found that male chimpanzees were more likely than females to bury-the-hatchet and make amends following fierce head-to-head conflicts with a same-sex chimp. These chimpanzee findings piqued the curiosity of the Harvard researchers to investigate if the same might be true for humans, too.
In an effort to find a human equivalent to mirror same-sex conflicts between chimpanzees, the researchers turned to the world of athletic competition. Many sports provide identical conflicts for males and females, which allows potential sex differences to be examined and deconstructed objectively. This study looked at post-competition differences between men and women in four sports: court tennis, table tennis, boxing, and badminton.
The August 2016 paper, “Cross-Cultural Sex Differences in Post-Conflict Affiliation following Sports Matches,” was published this week in the journal Current Biology.
For this study, Joyce Benenson and Richard Wrangham of the Harvard University Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, analyzed hundreds of YouTube videos of four different sports taking place in 44 different countries around the globe.
Sports Competitions Give Credence to the “Male Warrior Hypothesis”
While watching different sporting matches, the researchers focused their attention on the immediate interaction between competitors in the aftermath of their athletic competition. Their goal was to identify specific differences between how men and women touched one another when the game was over. Was it a quick and cold congratulatory handshake, a more tender pat on the back, or a big hug?
The researchers concluded that men are much more likely than women to engage in friendly physical contact—such as pats on the back, hugs, and interlocking handshakes—following athletic competition. The duration and frequency of affectionate physical contact after competing against a rival served as a benchmark for rating the strength of someone’s pro-social intentions.
Benenson believes these findings give credence to what evolutionary psychologists refer to as the “male warrior hypothesis.” This is the notion that males purposely nurture warm feelings after conflict to increase their odds of having allies to help defend their group in the future. In a statement, Benenson said,
“Our results indicate that unrelated human males are more predisposed than females to invest in a behavior, post-conflict affiliation, that is expected to facilitate future intragroup cooperation. This finding feels very counterintuitive because we have social science and evolutionary biology models that tell us males are much more competitive and aggressive.”
Throughout our evolution, prevailing in competitions has been a keystone of the survival of the fittest. The importance of post-conflict reconciliation between fierce opponents is often underestimated. This research suggests that making conciliatory physical gestures immediately after the dust has settled, might prevent someone from holding a grudge or being a sore loser.
Conclusion: Why Would Women Be Less Willing to Reconcile After a Conflict?
Since the earliest days of our evolution, chimps and humans have lived collectively in intermixed groups of males and females. Typically, anthropologists believe that males cultivated larger friendship networks, while females focused more on family relationships and a handful of close friends to help with child-rearing.
In today’s world, sportsmanlike displays of affection after an athletic competition have the power to facilitate future cooperation and friendship when athletes become comrades off the court. This phenomenon has been demonstrated in both chimpanzees and humans. Typically, whomever invests more in post-conflict resolution by being physically affectionate fosters future cooperation more effectively.
The male warrior hypothesis proposes that the overall success of our ancestors’ in-groups relied on the ability of men to triumph in one-on-one conflicts—while maintaining cooperation within the group and solidarity with outside groups. Benenson explains the parallel that occurs between male and female chimpanzees,
“Male chimps show tremendous aggression, even to the point of killing other males, but they also often reconcile immediately following a conflict. They do that because, in addition to the battle to sire the most offspring, they also have to cooperate to defend their community in lethal intergroup conflicts.
So the question is how do you get from these severely aggressive 1:1 dominance interactions to cooperating with your former opponents so you can preserve your entire community? We think post-conflict affiliation is the mechanism.”
The whole community benefits when unrelated men triumph over threatening external groups. On the flip side, women gain more by sticking close to family members and having one or two close friends who can share the burden of raising children.
From an evolutionary perspective, the researchers believe these factors drive women to reconcile with fewer individuals, while men strive to keep the peace with a larger number of unrelated same-sex peers. Could this explain why the “old boys’ club” is such a formidable and widespread fraternity?
Ultimately, Benenson and Wrangham believe the implications of this study have real-world ramifications that go far beyond the realm of sports. “What we’re talking about is women having a harder time when they have to compete with other women,” Benenson concludes. “Studies have shown that when two females compete in the workplace they feel much more damaged afterward. I think this is something human resources professionals should be aware of, so they can mitigate it.”
#ForgeByGames #OlympicGamesRio #OlympicRio #athletes #male #warrior #hypothesis #friendship #female #explain #Studies #Differences #compete #competitors #Sports
Search my other stuff At:
GOOGLE
As the 2016 #Olympic Games in #Rio get under way, it’s interesting to watch the body language of rival athletes from around the world responding to one another in the heat of the moment following “the thrill of victory and the agony of defeat.”
Do you believe that male athletes are typically more aggressive and cut-throat competitors than female athletes before, during, and after a sporting match? Interestingly, the latest research by evolutionary psychologists at Harvard University suggests that male athletes are actually more affectionate with one another after a fierce competition than their female counterparts.
The world of sports is, in many ways, a modern-day arena to play out primal same-sex conflicts. The Harvard researchers found that men are more likely than women to make peace with their competitors after the match is over. In fact, male winners and losers touched one another for longer and more affectionately after a sporting competition than female athletes.
Why Are Men More Reconciliatory Than Women After a Fierce Competition?
In the animal kingdom, previous studies found that male chimpanzees were more likely than females to bury-the-hatchet and make amends following fierce head-to-head conflicts with a same-sex chimp. These chimpanzee findings piqued the curiosity of the Harvard researchers to investigate if the same might be true for humans, too.
In an effort to find a human equivalent to mirror same-sex conflicts between chimpanzees, the researchers turned to the world of athletic competition. Many sports provide identical conflicts for males and females, which allows potential sex differences to be examined and deconstructed objectively. This study looked at post-competition differences between men and women in four sports: court tennis, table tennis, boxing, and badminton.
The August 2016 paper, “Cross-Cultural Sex Differences in Post-Conflict Affiliation following Sports Matches,” was published this week in the journal Current Biology.
For this study, Joyce Benenson and Richard Wrangham of the Harvard University Department of Human Evolutionary Biology, analyzed hundreds of YouTube videos of four different sports taking place in 44 different countries around the globe.
Sports Competitions Give Credence to the “Male Warrior Hypothesis”
While watching different sporting matches, the researchers focused their attention on the immediate interaction between competitors in the aftermath of their athletic competition. Their goal was to identify specific differences between how men and women touched one another when the game was over. Was it a quick and cold congratulatory handshake, a more tender pat on the back, or a big hug?
The researchers concluded that men are much more likely than women to engage in friendly physical contact—such as pats on the back, hugs, and interlocking handshakes—following athletic competition. The duration and frequency of affectionate physical contact after competing against a rival served as a benchmark for rating the strength of someone’s pro-social intentions.
Benenson believes these findings give credence to what evolutionary psychologists refer to as the “male warrior hypothesis.” This is the notion that males purposely nurture warm feelings after conflict to increase their odds of having allies to help defend their group in the future. In a statement, Benenson said,
“Our results indicate that unrelated human males are more predisposed than females to invest in a behavior, post-conflict affiliation, that is expected to facilitate future intragroup cooperation. This finding feels very counterintuitive because we have social science and evolutionary biology models that tell us males are much more competitive and aggressive.”
Throughout our evolution, prevailing in competitions has been a keystone of the survival of the fittest. The importance of post-conflict reconciliation between fierce opponents is often underestimated. This research suggests that making conciliatory physical gestures immediately after the dust has settled, might prevent someone from holding a grudge or being a sore loser.
Conclusion: Why Would Women Be Less Willing to Reconcile After a Conflict?
Since the earliest days of our evolution, chimps and humans have lived collectively in intermixed groups of males and females. Typically, anthropologists believe that males cultivated larger friendship networks, while females focused more on family relationships and a handful of close friends to help with child-rearing.
In today’s world, sportsmanlike displays of affection after an athletic competition have the power to facilitate future cooperation and friendship when athletes become comrades off the court. This phenomenon has been demonstrated in both chimpanzees and humans. Typically, whomever invests more in post-conflict resolution by being physically affectionate fosters future cooperation more effectively.
The male warrior hypothesis proposes that the overall success of our ancestors’ in-groups relied on the ability of men to triumph in one-on-one conflicts—while maintaining cooperation within the group and solidarity with outside groups. Benenson explains the parallel that occurs between male and female chimpanzees,
“Male chimps show tremendous aggression, even to the point of killing other males, but they also often reconcile immediately following a conflict. They do that because, in addition to the battle to sire the most offspring, they also have to cooperate to defend their community in lethal intergroup conflicts.
So the question is how do you get from these severely aggressive 1:1 dominance interactions to cooperating with your former opponents so you can preserve your entire community? We think post-conflict affiliation is the mechanism.”
The whole community benefits when unrelated men triumph over threatening external groups. On the flip side, women gain more by sticking close to family members and having one or two close friends who can share the burden of raising children.
From an evolutionary perspective, the researchers believe these factors drive women to reconcile with fewer individuals, while men strive to keep the peace with a larger number of unrelated same-sex peers. Could this explain why the “old boys’ club” is such a formidable and widespread fraternity?
Ultimately, Benenson and Wrangham believe the implications of this study have real-world ramifications that go far beyond the realm of sports. “What we’re talking about is women having a harder time when they have to compete with other women,” Benenson concludes. “Studies have shown that when two females compete in the workplace they feel much more damaged afterward. I think this is something human resources professionals should be aware of, so they can mitigate it.”
#ForgeByGames #OlympicGamesRio #OlympicRio #athletes #male #warrior #hypothesis #friendship #female #explain #Studies #Differences #compete #competitors #Sports
Search my other stuff At:
From
Forge By Games
No comments:
Post a Comment