How competitive sports can reduce gender inequality
In the job market, a competitive spirit seems to be sought after by many employers. This is undoubtedly why we see that former athletes often enjoy certain advantages when they are hired. These can take the form of a salary bonus, varying from 5% to 20% according to studies,benefits, or even greater employability. Several studies have also shown that competitive sports shape behavior, regardless of the type of sport practiced. Exposed to intense competition, athletes' risk tolerance is amplified and their desire to win is the fundamental driving force behind them.
Marc Willinger, University of Montpellier
Could this be a way to reduce gender gaps? If women developed a more risk-taking and competitive profile through competitive sports, would they have more employment opportunities and higher income prospects?
To demonstrate this, we conducted an experiment comparing athletes and non-athletes in terms of their attitudes toward risk and their taste for competition. The results highlight similarities between female athletes and male non-athletes.
A sport that reduces disparities
How can we measure whether someone is competitive or not? To do this, we used a variation of the protocol developed by two women, Muriel Niederle from Stanford University and Lise Vesterlund from the University of Pittsburgh. They focused on gender differences in this area: a lack of competitiveness among women and excessive competitiveness among men, compared to their respective performances. In our experiment, participants were asked to perform two tasks in succession: a counting task and a ball-throwing task.
In the first task, participants had to count, in five minutes, the number of "1"s in a series of tables where they were mixed with "0"s. In the second task, they had to throw three foam balls into a wastebasket two meters away.
In each case, participants had a choice between two payment methods. The first option was "piecework," which guaranteed participants would be paid according to their performance: each correct count or each ball in the basket earned 50 cents. It was also possible to opt for "tournament pay": this method of remuneration pits participants against other participants who have also made this choice. This option allows participants to receive a higher payout of €2 per correct count or per ball in the basket if they win. However, it does involve a risk: only the participant with the highest score in their group is paid. The others win nothing. By choosing tournament pay, participants reveal their taste for competition and their appetite for risk-taking, which was also measured independently using a specific individual risk-taking task.
78 athletes practicing individual sports and regularly participating (at least monthly) in national and/or international competitions were selected to take part in the study, along with 77 other participants not involved in sports championships. Approximately 85% of the participants were students. The two samples are comparable in terms of age distribution, gender, and level of education. All participants were volunteers.
61% of athletes chose the tournament for the ball-throwing task, compared to only 27% of non-athletes. For the counting task, 57% of athletes chose the tournament, compared to 41% of non-athletes. Female athletes proved to be less competitive than their male counterparts, but more competitive than non-athletic men. In the ball-throwing task, 50% of female athletes opted for the tournament, compared to 36% of non-athlete men and only 20% of non-athlete women. Similarly, for the counting task, 50% of female athletes opted for the tournament, compared to 42% of non-athlete men.
A similar result is observed for risk tolerance. Women who exercise have a level of risk tolerance comparable to that of men who do not exercise, whereas in the general population, almost all studies conclude that men have a greater tolerance for risk than women.
These observations suggest that competitive sports make female athletes more similar to men in terms of their appetite for risk and competitiveness, reducing gender differences in these two dimensions of their preferences.
Should a competitive spirit be developed at school?
What are the explanatory factors? Four hypotheses are possible.
First, female athletes may perform better in competitive tasks than non-athletes. They may prefer to be paid in tournaments because they believe they can achieve higher scores under competitive pressure. Second, female athletes may have a greater appetite for risk and therefore opt for tournaments more frequently than non-athletes. Third, they may be less prosocial than non-athletes: they may be less concerned about the negative consequences of choosing tournaments for others, i.e., the fact that there will be losers who are not rewarded for their efforts in the tasks. Finally, fourth, female athletes may have developed a strong taste for competition.
The first two hypotheses are clearly rejected by our data. Female athletes' scores for both experimental tasks are no better than those of non-athletes. Although they are slightly more risk-prone than non-athletes, risk tolerance has a negligible effect on the probability of choosing the tournament.
The third hypothesis concerning prosociality is also rejected. This factor is measured using experiments developed by experimental economics: the dictator game and the prisoner's dilemma game. In the first, participants are paired anonymously. One member of the pair, the dictator, receives €10 from the experimenter, while the other receives nothing. The dictator can transfer all or part of the amount received to his counterpart, or choose to keep it all.
The "prisoner's dilemma" games are inspired by the following situation. Two criminals are caught and thrown into prison, in separate cells. When questioned, they have the choice between remaining silent or placing the blame on their accomplice. If one talks while the other remains silent, the first will be set free and the second will receive a heavy sentence. If both talk, however, the sentence will be heavier than if they had both remained silent.
Admittedly, we were able to show that female athletes are less generous in the dictator game and less cooperative in the prisoner's dilemma. Nevertheless, the prosociality measured in this way does not show a significant correlation with the probability of choosing the tournament.
We therefore conclude that female athletes' taste for competition is the determining factor in their propensity to choose the tournament, a conclusion supported by the responses to an independent questionnaire measuring competitiveness. It should also be noted that choosing the tournament allows athletes to compare themselves to others and find out whether their own score was better than that of other randomly selected individuals, which is information that is particularly valued and sought after by athletes.
Sports that involve a strong competitive element seem to make female athletes more competitive and develop their appetite for risk, two qualities that are valued and sought after by many employers. Getting women involved in competitive sports therefore appears to be a way of reducing certain gender gaps, an approach that could be encouraged inthe education of young girls from an early age.
Marc Willinger, Professor of Economics, Behavioral and Experimental Economics, University of Montpellier
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Readthe original article.