| Title |
The impact of stress on tournament entry
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Experimental Economics, November 2016
|
| DOI | 10.1007/s10683-016-9496-x |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Thomas Buser, Anna Dreber, Johanna Mollerstrom |
| Abstract |
Individual willingness to enter competitive environments predicts career choices and labor market outcomes. Meanwhile, many people experience competitive contexts as stressful. We use two laboratory experiments to investigate whether factors related to stress can help explain individual differences in tournament entry. Experiment 1 studies whether stress responses (measured as salivary cortisol) to taking part in a mandatory tournament predict individual willingness to participate in a voluntary tournament. We find that competing increases stress levels. This cortisol response does not predict tournament entry for men but is positively and significantly correlated with choosing to enter the tournament for women. In Experiment 2, we exogenously induce physiological stress using the cold-pressor task. We find a positive causal effect of stress on tournament entry for women but no effect for men. Finally, we show that although the effect of stress on tournament entry differs between the genders, stress reactions cannot explain the well-documented gender difference in willingness to compete. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Australia | 1 | 25% |
| Netherlands | 1 | 25% |
| United States | 1 | 25% |
| Unknown | 1 | 25% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 75 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 75 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 15 | 20% |
| Student > Bachelor | 7 | 9% |
| Student > Master | 6 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 5 | 7% |
| Lecturer | 5 | 7% |
| Other | 11 | 15% |
| Unknown | 26 | 35% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Economics, Econometrics and Finance | 28 | 37% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 3 | 4% |
| Business, Management and Accounting | 3 | 4% |
| Social Sciences | 3 | 4% |
| Neuroscience | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 5 | 7% |
| Unknown | 31 | 41% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 3. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 31 May 2017.
All research outputs
#13,124,642
of 22,901,818 outputs
Outputs from Experimental Economics
#225
of 338 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#157,859
of 310,682 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Experimental Economics
#5
of 9 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,901,818 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 338 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 10.1. This one is in the 33rd percentile – i.e., 33% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 310,682 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 49th percentile – i.e., 49% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 9 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has scored higher than 4 of them.