Search

A contribution to a special issue on Hormones and Human Competition.Testosterone is theorized to influence status-seeking behaviors such as social dominance and competitive behavior, but supporting evidence is mixed. The present study tested the roles of testosterone and cortisol in the hawk-dove game, a dyadic economic decision-making paradigm in which earnings depend on one's own and the other player's choices. If one person selects the hawk strategy and the other person selects the dove strategy, the player who selected hawk attains a greater financial pay-off (status differentiation). The worst financial outcome occurs when both players choose the hawk strategy (status confrontation). Ninety-eight undergraduate students (42 men) provided saliva samples and played ten rounds of the hawk-dove game with another same-sex participant. In support of the hypothesis that testosterone is related to status concern, individuals higher in basal testosterone made more hawk decisions - decisions that harmed the other player. Acute decreases in cortisol were also associated with more hawk decisions. There was some empirical support for the dual-hormone hypothesis as well: basal testosterone was positively related to satisfaction in the game among low basal-cortisol individuals but not among high basal-cortisol individuals. There were no significant sex differences in these hormonal effects. The present findings align with theories of hormones and status-seeking behavior at the individual level, but they also open up new avenues for research on hormone profiles at the collective level. Our results suggest that the presence of two or more high-testosterone members increases the likelihood of status confrontations over a limited resource that can undermine collective outcomes., (Copyright © 2017 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

High social status reduces stress responses in numerous species, but the stress-buffering effect of status may dissipate or even reverse during times of hierarchical instability. In an experimental test of this hypothesis, 118 participants (57.3% female) were randomly assigned to a high- or low-status position in a stable or unstable hierarchy and were then exposed to a social-evaluative stressor (a mock job interview). High status in a stable hierarchy buffered stress responses and improved interview performance, but high status in an unstable hierarchy boosted stress responses and did not lead to better performance. This general pattern of effects was observed across endocrine (cortisol and testosterone), psychological (feeling in control), and behavioral (competence, dominance, and warmth) responses to the stressor. The joint influence of status and hierarchy stability on interview performance was explained by feelings of control and testosterone reactivity. Greater feelings of control predicted enhanced interview performance, whereas increased testosterone reactivity predicted worse performance. These results provide direct causal evidence that high status confers adaptive benefits for stress reduction and performance only when the social hierarchy is stable. When the hierarchy is unstable, high status actually exacerbates stress responses., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Prior research has shown that an individual's hormonal profile can influence the individual's social standing within a group. We introduce a different construct-a collective hormonal profile-which describes a group's hormonal make-up. We test whether a group's collective hormonal profile is related to its performance. Analysis of 370 individuals randomly assigned to work in 74 groups of three to six individuals revealed that group-level concentrations of testosterone and cortisol interact to predict a group's standing across groups. Groups with a collective hormonal profile characterized by high testosterone and low cortisol exhibited the highest performance. These collective hormonal level results remained reliable when controlling for personality traits and group-level variability in hormones. These findings support the hypothesis that groups with a biological propensity toward status pursuit (high testosterone) coupled with reduced stress-axis activity (low cortisol) engage in profit-maximizing decision-making. The current work extends the dual-hormone hypothesis to the collective level and provides a neurobiological perspective on the factors that determine who rises to the top across, not just within, social hierarchies., Competing Interests: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Traditional theories propose that testosterone should increase dominance and other status-seeking behaviors, but empirical support has been inconsistent. The present research tested the hypothesis that testosterone's effect on dominance depends on cortisol, a glucocorticoid hormone implicated in psychological stress and social avoidance. In the domains of leadership (Study 1, mixed-sex sample) and competition (Study 2, male-only sample), testosterone was positively related to dominance, but only in individuals with low cortisol. In individuals with high cortisol, the relation between testosterone and dominance was blocked (Study 1) or reversed (Study 2). Study 2 further showed that these hormonal effects on dominance were especially likely to occur after social threat (social defeat). The present studies provide the first empirical support for the claim that the neuroendocrine reproductive (HPG) and stress (HPA) axes interact to regulate dominance. Because dominance is related to gaining and maintaining high status positions in social hierarchies, the findings suggest that only when cortisol is low should higher testosterone encourage higher status. When cortisol is high, higher testosterone may actually decrease dominance and in turn motivate lower status., (Copyright © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Past research suggests that individuals high in basal testosterone are motivated to gain high status. The present research extends previous work by examining endocrinological and behavioral consequences of high and low status as a function of basal testosterone. The outcome of a competition--victory versus defeat--was used as a marker of status. In Study 1, high testosterone men who lost in a dog agility competition rose in cortisol, whereas high testosterone men who won dropped in cortisol. Low testosterone men's cortisol changes did not depend on whether they had won or lost. Study 2 replicated this pattern of cortisol changes in women who participated in an experimental laboratory competition, and Study 2 extended the cortisol findings to behavior. Specifically, high testosterone winners chose to repeat the competitive task, whereas high testosterone losers chose to avoid it. In contrast, low testosterone winners and losers did not differ in their task preferences. These results provide novel evidence in humans that basal testosterone predicts cortisol reactivity and behavior following changes in social status. Implications for the social endocrinology of dominance are discussed., ((PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2008 APA, all rights reserved).)

Why do some people strive for high status, whereas others actively avoid it? In the present studies, the authors examined the psychological and physiological consequences of a mismatch between baseline testosterone and a person's current level of status. The authors tested this mismatch effect by placing high and low testosterone individuals into high or low status positions using a rigged competition. In Study 1, low testosterone participants reported greater emotional arousal, focused more on their status, and showed worse cognitive functioning in a high status position. High testosterone participants showed this pattern in a low status position. In Study 2, the emotional arousal findings were replicated with heart rate, and the cognitive findings were replicated using a math test. In Study 3, the authors demonstrate that testosterone is a better predictor of behavior than self-report measures of the need for dominance. Discussion focuses on the value of measuring hormones in personality and social psychology., (Copyright 2006 APA, all rights reserved.)

The present experiment tested the causal impact of testosterone on human competitive decision-making. According to prevailing theories about testosterone’s role in social behavior, testosterone should directly boost competitive decisions. But recent correlational evidence suggests that testosterone’s behavioral effects may depend on specific aspects of the context and person relevant to social status (win–lose context and trait dominance). We tested the causal influence of testosterone on competitive decisions by combining hormone administration with measures of trait dominance and a newly developed social competition task in which the victory–defeat context was experimentally manipulated, in a sample of 54 female participants. Consistent with the hypothesis that testosterone has context- and person-dependent effects on competitive behavior, testosterone increased competitive decisions after victory only among high-dominant individuals but testosterone decreased competitive decisions after defeat across all participants. These results suggest that testosterone flexibly modulates competitive decision-making depending on prior social experience and dominance motivation in the service of enhancing social status. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A novel 'field' study recently published in Aggressive Behavior found that individual differences in baseline testosterone concentrations were positively correlated with endorsement of political aggression and that baseline cortisol concentrations were negatively correlated with self-reported aggression among Palestinian boys living in Gaza. Here, we discuss recent evidence indicating that testosterone and cortisol interact to predict competitive, aggressive, and dominant behaviors and urge researchers collecting both hormones to perform and report analyses that formally test for such interaction effects. Aggr. Behav. 37:489-491, 2011. © 2011 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]