This article is stated as a ‘study’ in psychology and social behavior in order to provide understanding between our ‘complex’ actions and competition in the society. The authors utilized such an easy-to-follow paragraph, clear statements and valid examples that help the reader understand better. They not only used the word ‘actor’ to emphasize on the action between individuals, but also divide a competition in 3 areas; the relevance of a performance dimension, the actor’s similarity to the target and the actor’s relationship closeness to the target.
Firstly, the relevance of a performance dimension; it shows that if the actor relates to the target, the competition behavior tends to be more intense and higher spontaneously. Likewise the actor’s similarity to the target, if the actor and the target have ‘a thing’ in common, it also effects the level of competition. To clarify, the actor seeks to be more competitive than usual if he or she relates or similar to the target. According to this article, the authors define a competition as “the action to reduce discrepancies interacts with the unidirectional push to do better and better”, which slightly similar to werron’s perspective that shows the competition matters, furthermore, it controls the market and consumer’s behavior in the society. To be more specific, it shows that the competition is inevitable. It is ubiquitous– so common that it is embedded in our personality in the individual level, which leads to the second dimension of this research, relationship closeness (social factor)– the authors give an understandable example like in the Incentive Structure part, how they mention zero-sum game, as we all realize, the competition is ubiquitous– even in the nature, there is pray and predator which implies to a ‘game of survival’. This article realizes me that the competition is every where, like Werron’s perspective, as well as a little part in hutcheon’s. The competition can also triggered and fluctuated by the audience in the society. For example, when there is social dilemmas, people tend to be more ‘co-operative’ and ‘competitive’. Also, the number of competitors is one of the factors that vary the individual behavior. People are more ‘ambitious’ and ‘determine’ when they have to compete with their neck-and-neck rivals.
Looking from my perspective, there is competition in the family as well, the least place that competition seems to occur but it turns to be the most competitive and pressure than other place. To give a clear experience, family business. Father pave the way for his son and expect to see progress or development– that is counted as ‘family pressure’ for his son. If he can’t make it better than his father did, he is going to be judged as a ‘loser’. I totally agree with this statement, where it is said the competition is everywhere. Aside from all I mentioned above, it reflects the social “actor” really well and coherently and it also contribute to the personal knowledge which benefits this article reflects the society in an unusual perspective.