Beating up the Weakling

Non conformity is one reason some kids get picked on.  Like I talked about yesterday, peer pressure causes school kids to try their best to act and look the same as one another.  The kids spend so much time worrying about looking like their neighbor that education takes a back seat.  But, the question today is, why do some kids get picked on more than others?  I might have found a partial answer.  Two psychologists, one from Cornell University and the other from Ohio State University ran some experiments on Cornell students to see how hard they would try on a task if they thought they were competing against either a superior opponent or an inferior one.  The researchers told students they would be competing against another university, ranked either higher or lower than them, in team academic contests.  For example, one contest was to write down as many uses for a knife as they could think of in some time limit.  The researchers also added that the contests had nothing to do with academic performance and, thus, the rankings would not predict which team would win.  

The Results:   

It turns out that when the students thought they were competing against a perceived weaker opponent (even though it was a lie) they tried much harder to win and actually came up with more matches for, say, the knife question.  When they competed against an opponent who they thought was better, they did worse.  But why?  It seems to me totally backwards.  Why try less against an opponent that should be harder to beat?  The researchers speculate it could have to do with conservation of effort.  The students might have thought they should have tried hard to win the battles they were supposed to win but save their energy on the ones that would be tougher.  After all, they wouldn’t be faulted if they lost the tough ones.  

A Contradiction:  

These recent findings contradict an earlier study that showed the opposite, that people try hard against stiffer competition.  The difference, however, between the two studies is the previous study did not involve a threat to the competitors’ status whereas this most recent one did.  Therefore, the difference in the results might lie in the students’ fear of losing status in their peer group.  If they lose to an inferior opponent it would mean a shift in social status.  In that case the results make sense.  

How does this Relate to School?  

I see bullying as at least partially due to peer pressure.  A bully can maintain his status easier by beating up on a bunch of weaklings than if he were to seek out tougher competition.  Because, after all, what if he picked the wrong mark and lost?  That would mean an instant status collapse.  He can’t risk it so he picks on the weakest kids first.  If you’ve ever noticed how bullies behave, whether they are verbally or physically abusive, they always seem to be looking over their shoulder for some support from the throng of kids who invariably migrate towards the commotion.  If the group is with him he’ll become more vicious.  Obviously, his performance is strongly tied to what other people think of him.  He wouldn’t put in the effort if nobody cared.    

Peer pressure causes kids, and adults, too, to do all sorts of strange things.  Our desire to maintain status can even psychologically cause us to throw in the towel in circumstances where we really shouldn’t.  Without being reminded of your inferiority, do you think there are some people who are better than you (or the opposite — do you feel superior)?  Has your level of effort, when competing with them, been affected by your assumptions about your chances of victory?  I know someone who, ever since we were kids, thought he was better than me in most things.  He intentionally chose to compete in only the things he thought he had the best chances of winning, wagering on an easy win to help his sagging ego.  We were so equally matched though that even the simple competitions turned into major battles.  Undeterred in his assumption that I must be inferior, the battles became more and more fierce.  We still compete to this day but more playfully than in the past, and shockingly, we’re best friends.  He has since learned, the hard way, that I’m no patsy.  I always wondered why he seemed to try so hard to beat me on even the most playful just-for-fun competitions.  This simple aphorism: hindsight is 20/20, fits well here.  My suspicion is that we can all think of cases where this experiment might be applied to our own lives.  

Note:  I read the article describing the research in this Month’s Scientific American Mind Magazine.