Abstract
Understanding how people of different ages decide in competition is a question of theoretical and practical importance. Using an experimental laboratory approach, this research investigates the ability of younger and older adults to think and act strategically with equal or unequal resources. In zero-sum games of resource allocation, younger adults (19–35 years) and older adults (65–81 years) made strategic decisions in competition against opponents of a similar age (Study 1; N = 120) or different age (Study 2; N = 120). The findings highlight people’s ability to make good interpersonal decisions in complex scenarios: Both younger and older adults were aware of their relative strength (in terms of material resources) and allocated their resources adaptively. When competing against opponents of a similar age, people’s gains were in line with game-theoretic predictions. However, younger adults made superior strategic allocations and won more frequently when competing against older adults. Measures of fluid cognitive and numerical abilities correlated with strategic behavior in interpersonal competition.
Highlights
Understanding how people of different ages decide in competition is a question of theoretical and practical importance
Much political and economic power is concentrated in the hands of older adults: with a median age of 63 years, influential leaders and businesspeople are older than most citizens in their countries, according to a Forbes ranking of the “world’s most powerful people”[1]
Older adults may selectively invest their limited resources across fewer fields and subsequently perform as well as younger adults. We examined these hypotheses in two studies in which participants competed for real money, based on their strategic allocations
Summary
Understanding how people of different ages decide in competition is a question of theoretical and practical importance. Humans and other animals compete for survival, prosperity, or standing—but the means available for competition may differ dramatically It is a pertinent question whether and how people’s strategic allocation decisions differ as a function of age and with the material resources they hold. The main goal of our research was to investigate younger and older adults’ interpersonal decisions in a game-theoretically formalized competition that requires strategic allocations. We study strategic allocations in competition with the Colonel Blotto g ame[10] In this classic two-person zero-sum game, players simultaneously distribute their material resources (“troops”) across a set of fields (“battlefields”); battles are waged over all or a subset of the fields. Players endowed with fewer resources (weaker players) should strategically concentrate their resources on fewer fields, abandoning some fields altogether in order to effectively compete with stronger players on the remaining fields (see section Game-Theoretic Benchmarks for details)
Sign-in/Register to view highlights & summary Sign-in/Register to access full text options 
Free) 
Talk to us
Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have
Schedule a call
