Nav: Home

After the fight, friendship

August 04, 2016

It's not exactly front-page news that when it comes to conflict, men and women are very different.

The way they resolve those conflicts, though, is another story.

While men are often portrayed as aggressive and combative, a new study shows that, from the tennis court to the boxing ring -- the modern-day equivalent of one-on-one conflict -- men are more likely than women to make peace with their competitors after the final whistle blows.

Using videos of four sports in 44 countries, Joyce Benenson, an associate of Harvard's Human Evolutionary Biology Department and a professor of psychology at Emmanuel College and Richard Wrangham, the Ruth B. Moore Professor of Human Evolutionary Biology, found that men are far more likely to engage in friendly physical contact -- handshakes, back pats and even hugs -- following competition than women. The study is described in an August 4 paper in Current Biology.

Importantly, Benenson said, the study also lends credence to what researchers call the "male warrior hypothesis" - the notion that males broker good feelings after conflict to ensure they can call on allies to help defend the group in the future.

"This finding feels very counterintuitive because we have social science and and evolutionary biology models that tell us males are much more competitive and aggressive," Benenson said.

Though accurate, thosemodels are incomplete, because they didn't explain acurious behavior observed among male chimps.

"Male chimps show tremendous aggression, even to the point of killing other males, but they also often reconcile immediately following a conflict," she said. "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 quest to understand that mechanism has been a years-long search for Benenson.

The study was sparked by questions of how men prevail against outside groups -- whether in war or in symbolic battles like business deals -- while still continually competing with others in their own group. Earlier studies had shown male chimps were more likely than females to try to put hard feelings to rest following a head-to-head conflict, spurring Benenson and Wrangham to wonder whether the same might be true among humans.

To get at the question, they turned to a modern form of conflict -- sports. Sports provide identical conflicts for males and females, so sex differences can be objectively examined.

Scouring YouTube and the video archive of several international sports federations, researchers found hundreds of videos of tennis, table tennis, badminton and boxing matches, and focused their attention not on the match itself, but its immediate aftermath.

"We watched carefully to see what happened after the match ended," she said. "The requirement is that people touch after the match ends, but how do they touch? They can just touch hands quickly, or they can really shake hands or give a pat or even a hug."

Researchers watched hundreds of matches, taking care to ensure no player was repeated in any match, and found clear sex differences in all four sports.

"Most people think of females as being less competitive, or more cooperative, so you might expect there would be more reconciliation between females," Benensonsaid. "With their families, females are more cooperative than males, investing in children and other kin. With unrelated same-sex peers however, after conflicts, in males you see these very warm handshakes and embraces, even in boxing after they've almost killed each other."

So why is it that women seem less willing to reconcile following conflict?

Part of the answer, Benenson and Wrangham believe , may be tied to traditional gender roles that stretch to the earliest days of human history. Chimps and humans lived in groups of both males and females, but while males cultivate large friendship networks, females focus more on family relationships and a handful of few close friends - partly as a way to share the burden of raising children. The whole community gains when unrelated men successfully prevail against external groups. In contrast, women gain more from family members and 1-2 close friends who help with child care. It makes sense therefore that women should reconcile more with these individuals, and men with a larger number of unrelated same-sex peers.

Ultimately, Benenson said, the implications of the study could reach far beyond the boundaries of the playing field.

"What we're talking about is women having a harder time when they have to compete with other women," she said. "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."
-end-


Harvard University

Related Conflict Articles:

Violence against conflict-affected teenage girls in Africa is widespread
A majority of displaced adolescent girls are victimized by violence, according to a new study in the Democratic Republic of Congo and Ethiopia by researchers at Columbia University's Mailman School of Public Health.
When the smoke clears... tobacco control in post-conflict settings
In new research published today by King's College London - Institute of Cancer Policy and the Conflict & Health Research Group in the journal ecancermedicalscience, the difficulties of prioritizing preventable disease and long term health issues in post conflict zones are explored.
Brain circuit enables split-second decisions when cues conflict
MIT researchers have identified a circuit in the brain that is critical for governing how we respond to conflicting environmental cues.
When people prepare for conflict, dominant leaders take the stage
One popular theory holds that dominant leaders are supported by those who fear new situations and threats.
Why do killer whales go through menopause? Mother-daughter conflict is key
Killer whales are one of only three species that are known to go through menopause, surviving long after they've stopped reproducing.
The conflict between science and religion lies in our brains
The conflict between science and religion may have its origins in the structure of our brains.
Hope for peace may be encouraged by enemies in Israeli-Palestinian conflict
Jewish Israelis may feel more hopeful when they hear messages of hope from Palestinians regardless of whether they are portrayed as peace activists or former militia members who had attacked Israeli military targets, according to new research published in Social Psychological and Personality Science.
HIV spreads faster as violent conflict looms
A new Brown University analysis of HIV incidence in 36 sub-Saharan African countries finds that new HIV infections rise significantly in the five years before armed conflict breaks out.
Highly religious Americans are less likely to see conflict between faith and science
Highly religious Americans are less likely than others to see conflict between faith and science.
Reduced conflict-related brain activity may indicate risk for psychosis
Researchers led by Bradley S. Peterson, M.D., director of the Institute for the Developing Mind at Children's Hospital Los Angeles, have shown that lower levels of conflict-related brain activity are associated with a higher risk for later psychosis.

Related Conflict Reading:

Best Science Podcasts 2019

We have hand picked the best science podcasts for 2019. Sit back and enjoy new science podcasts updated daily from your favorite science news services and scientists.
Now Playing: TED Radio Hour

Digital Manipulation
Technology has reshaped our lives in amazing ways. But at what cost? This hour, TED speakers reveal how what we see, read, believe — even how we vote — can be manipulated by the technology we use. Guests include journalist Carole Cadwalladr, consumer advocate Finn Myrstad, writer and marketing professor Scott Galloway, behavioral designer Nir Eyal, and computer graphics researcher Doug Roble.
Now Playing: Science for the People

#530 Why Aren't We Dead Yet?
We only notice our immune systems when they aren't working properly, or when they're under attack. How does our immune system understand what bits of us are us, and what bits are invading germs and viruses? How different are human immune systems from the immune systems of other creatures? And is the immune system so often the target of sketchy medical advice? Those questions and more, this week in our conversation with author Idan Ben-Barak about his book "Why Aren't We Dead Yet?: The Survivor’s Guide to the Immune System".