IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/oup/beheco/v17y2006i4p597-605.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Victory displays: a game-theoretic analysis

Author

Listed:
  • Mike Mesterton-Gibbons
  • Tom N. Sherratt

Abstract

Two rationales have been proposed verbally for the function of victory displays, which are performed by the winners of contests but not by the losers. The "advertising" rationale is that victory displays are attempts to communicate victory to other members of a social group that do not pay attention to contests or cannot otherwise identify the winner. The "browbeating" rationale is that victory displays are attempts to decrease the probability that the loser of a contest will initiate a future contest with the same individual. We formally explore the logic of these rationales with game-theoretic models. The models show that both rationales are logically sound; however, all other things being equal, the intensity of victory displays will be highest through advertising in groups where the reproductive advantage of dominance is low and highest through browbeating in groups where the reproductive advantage of dominance is high. Copyright 2006.

Suggested Citation

  • Mike Mesterton-Gibbons & Tom N. Sherratt, 2006. "Victory displays: a game-theoretic analysis," Behavioral Ecology, International Society for Behavioral Ecology, vol. 17(4), pages 597-605, July.
    • Handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:17:y:2006:i:4:p:597-605
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1093/beheco/ark008
    Download Restriction: Access to full text is restricted to subscribers.
    ---><---

    As the access to this document is restricted, you may want to search for a different version of it.

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:oup:beheco:v:17:y:2006:i:4:p:597-605. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no bibliographic references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: Oxford University Press (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://academic.oup.com/beheco .

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.