Game, Set, and Match: Do Women and Men Perform Differently in Competitive Situations?

Jetter, Michael; Walker, Jay K.

doi:10.2139/ssrn.2585324

Cited by 3 publications

(7 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Second, men and women exhibit virtually identical results, suggesting that competitive women can tackle failures just as well as competitive men. The result is in line with results from observational studies on professional tennis players (see Wozniak, ; Jetter and Walker, ; Banko, Leeds, and Leeds, ).…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

“…Wozniak () and Jetter and Walker () both use data from all‐male and all‐female professional tennis tournaments to study how the probability of winning the current game is affected by previous results. They both find that men and women are more likely to win the current game if they have experienced recent successes, and they also see that these effects are very similar in magnitude across the genders.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Are the Most Competitive Men More Resilient to Failures than the Most Competitive Women? Evidence from Professional Golf Tournaments*

Rosenqvist

2019

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Objectives Women are underrepresented in top positions and experimental evidence suggests that one explanation is gender differences in preferences for competition, that is, fewer women than men enter competition‐intensive careers. Less is known about whether there are remaining gender differences in competitiveness within the subpopulation of men and women that choose to pursue such careers, which creates further female underrepresentation in top positions. Studying a subcomponent of competitiveness, namely resilience to failures, this article provides quasi experimental evidence from the field on this issue. Methods I study professional golfers’ resilience to failures by estimating the causal effect of a failure in one tournament on the performance in the next. Results The results show that both male and female golfers respond negatively to failures, and that their responses are virtually identical. Conclusion Thus, in this particular subpopulation of competitive men and women there seems to be no gender difference in resilience to failures.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 90%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Are the Most Competitive Men More Resilient to Failures than the Most Competitive Women? Evidence from Professional Golf Tournaments*

Rosenqvist

2019

Social Science Quarterly

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…This finding is in strict opposition to anecdotal and common sense evidence presented in the media by journalists, coaches, and players. Wozniak (2012) and Jetter and Walker (2015) focused on the "hot-hand effect," analysing any differences between women and men in influences of the previous matches on their competitive performance. Wozniak (2012) revealed gender differences and similarities: "[B]oth men and women are more likely to enter tournaments after doing well, but women are affected by their last tournament while men's previous performance can affect entry beyond the next tournament" (p. 158).…”

Section: Studies Analysing the Differences In Female And Male Tennis Players' Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

“…The higher ability women also react positively to the results from their last tournament while men do not (Wozniak, 2012). Jetter and Walker (2015) found, in their examination of the hot-hand effect, no gender differences at all, then went further to analyse the "clutch-player effect" and found that "top-ranked female players are at least as likely as males to perform well in important matches." (p. 107) Contrary to those results, the most recent study of De Paola and Scoppa (2017) had the following findings:…”

Section: Studies Analysing the Differences In Female And Male Tennis Players' Performancementioning

confidence: 99%

Anything Can Happen in Women’s Tennis, or Can It? An Empirical Investigation Into Bias in Sports Journalism

Tejkalová

Krištoufek

2019

Communication & Sport

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The claim that “anything is possible in women’s sports” frequently employed by both sports journalists and general audiences highlights the widespread perception of a seemingly uncontested truth about female athletes and their (in)ability to perform consistently at peak levels in comparison to male athletes. We focus on this treatment of female athletes in the world of women’s tennis and contest the “common sense” and “experience” justifications of the unpredictability in women’s sports with actual data to reveal clear media bias. Utilising a database of the Association of Tennis Professionals and Women’s Tennis Association tournaments dating back to the late 1960s and covering approximately 225,000 fully described matches, we examine the “anything can happen in women’s tennis” assumption through logistic regression, focusing on the effect of rank differential on the winning probability in the match while controlling for other factors (tournament type and stage, court surface, age differential, and elite players). The results are rather shocking. The women’s matches do not show higher instability or lower predictability at all, but rather the contrary—the men’s matches show lower dependence on the rank difference. The results are robust as checked for data sets of the year 2000 onwards and those including only special events such as Grand Slams.

show abstract

“… Recent studies have exploited the fact that tennis is one of the few sports where men and women earn comparable amounts of compensation, yet compete in separated events (e.g., see Jetter and Walker, , studying hot hand and clutch player effects, or Grove and Jetter, , who analyze the progression from juniors to professional tennis players). Golf may be the only other exception.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Good Girl, Bad Boy? Evidence Consistent with Collusion in Professional Tennis

Jetter¹,

Walker

2017

Southern Economic Journal

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

We identify professional tennis matches where one player competes for extraordinarily high payoffs while their opposition does not. Players “on the bubble” of direct qualification to upcoming Grand Slam events face substantially higher stakes than opponents, which presents an opportunity for collusion. Our findings produce evidence that is consistent with the hypothesis of unethical behavior taking place on the men's tour, as bubble players are 5.1 percentage points more likely to beat better ranked opponents than in comparable nonbubble matches. However, no such evidence emerges when analyzing women's tennis. We find additional support for the hypothesis of match‐fixing activities on the men's tour from analyzing the occurrence of tie‐breaks and the fact that our results become stronger once monetary incentives were increased after the 2013 season. Finally, the betting market does not predict this phenomenon, further confirming our suspicion of irregular activities.

show abstract

Game, Set, and Match: Do Women and Men Perform Differently in Competitive Situations?

Cited by 3 publications

References 36 publications

Are the Most Competitive Men More Resilient to Failures than the Most Competitive Women? Evidence from Professional Golf Tournaments*

Are the Most Competitive Men More Resilient to Failures than the Most Competitive Women? Evidence from Professional Golf Tournaments*

Anything Can Happen in Women’s Tennis, or Can It? An Empirical Investigation Into Bias in Sports Journalism

Good Girl, Bad Boy? Evidence Consistent with Collusion in Professional Tennis

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About