Literature DB >> 29237857

Using knowledge from human research to improve understanding of contest theory and contest dynamics.

Michael M Kasumovic1, Khandis Blake2, Thomas F Denson3.   

Abstract

Our understanding of animal contests and the factors that affect contest dynamics and decisions stems from a long and prosperous collaboration between empiricists and theoreticians. Over the last two decades, however, theoretical predictions regarding the factors that affect individual decisions before, during and after a contest are becoming increasingly difficult to test empirically. Extremely large sample sizes are necessary to experimentally test the nuanced theoretical assumptions surrounding how information is used by animals during a contest, how context changes the information used, and how individuals change behaviour as a result of both the information available and the context in which the information is acquired. In this review, we discuss how the investigation of contests in humans through the collaboration of biologists and psychologists may advance contest theory and dynamics in general. We argue that a long and productive history exploring human behaviour and psychology combined with technological advancements provide a unique opportunity to manipulate human perception during contests and collect unbiased data, allowing more targeted examinations of particular aspects of contest theory (e.g. winner/loser effects, information use as a function of age). We hope that our perspective provides the impetus for many future collaborations between biologists and psychologists.
© 2017 The Author(s).

Entities:  

Keywords:  assessment; contests; fighting; human

Mesh:

Year:  2017        PMID: 29237857      PMCID: PMC5745418          DOI: 10.1098/rspb.2017.2182

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Proc Biol Sci        ISSN: 0962-8452            Impact factor:   5.349


  55 in total

1.  Understanding and using the implicit association test: I. An improved scoring algorithm.

Authors:  Anthony G Greenwald; Brian A Nosek; Mahzarin R Banaji
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2003-08

2.  Examination of prior contest experience and the retention of winner and loser effects.

Authors:  Michael M Kasumovic; Damian O Elias; Senthurran Sivalinghem; Andrew C Mason; Maydianne C B Andrade
Journal:  Behav Ecol       Date:  2010-01-27       Impact factor: 2.671

3.  Prefrontal neurons represent winning and losing during competitive video shooting games between monkeys.

Authors:  Takayuki Hosokawa; Masataka Watanabe
Journal:  J Neurosci       Date:  2012-05-30       Impact factor: 6.167

Review 4.  Modeling the evolution of winner and loser effects: A survey and prospectus.

Authors:  Mike Mesterton-Gibbons; Yao Dai; Marlène Goubault
Journal:  Math Biosci       Date:  2016-02-10       Impact factor: 2.144

5.  Resource defense and juvenile hormone: the "challenge hypothesis" extended to insects.

Authors:  Michelle Pellissier Scott
Journal:  Horm Behav       Date:  2005-08-08       Impact factor: 3.587

6.  Communication of male quality in owl hoots.

Authors:  Loïc A Hardouin; David Reby; Christian Bavoux; Guy Burneleau; Vincent Bretagnolle
Journal:  Am Nat       Date:  2007-02-07       Impact factor: 3.926

7.  The pupil as a measure of emotional arousal and autonomic activation.

Authors:  Margaret M Bradley; Laura Miccoli; Miguel A Escrig; Peter J Lang
Journal:  Psychophysiology       Date:  2008-02-11       Impact factor: 4.016

8.  Implicit attitudes towards homosexuality: reliability, validity, and controllability of the IAT.

Authors:  R Banse; J Seise; N Zerbes
Journal:  Z Exp Psychol       Date:  2001

9.  Predictive validity of an Implicit Association Test for assessing anxiety.

Authors:  Boris Egloff; Stefan C Schmukle
Journal:  J Pers Soc Psychol       Date:  2002-12

10.  Competition-related factors directly influence preferences for facial cues of dominance in allies.

Authors:  Christopher D Watkins; Benedict C Jones
Journal:  Behav Ecol Sociobiol       Date:  2016-10-05       Impact factor: 2.980

View more
  3 in total

1.  Humans as a model for understanding biological fundamentals.

Authors:  Sarah F Brosnan; Erik Postma
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 5.349

2.  Humans as model organisms.

Authors:  Kim Sterelny
Journal:  Proc Biol Sci       Date:  2017-12-20       Impact factor: 5.349

3.  Facial width-to-height ratio predicts fighting success: A direct replication and extension of Zilioli et al. (2014).

Authors:  Neil R Caton; John Hannan; Barnaby J W Dixson
Journal:  Aggress Behav       Date:  2022-03-08       Impact factor: 3.047

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.