In this paper we examine the role of rank, such as whether you are ranked #3 or #4 or #97 or #98 out of a hundred, on choices of strategy. The findings have implications for theories of motivation, social comparison, cooperation and competition.

Garcia, S., Tor, A., & Gonzalez, R. (2006). Ranks and rivals: A theory of competition. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 32, 970-982. doi:10.1177/0146167206287640 PDF

Abstract

Social comparison theories typically imply a comparable degree ofcompetition between commensurate rivals who are competing on amutually important dimension. However, the present analysis reveals that the degree of competition between such rivals depends on their proximity to a meaningful standard. Studies 1 to 3 test the prediction that individuals become more competitive and less willing to maximize profitable joint gains when they and their commensurate rivals are highly ranked (e.g., #2 vs. #3) than when they are not (e.g., #202 vs. #203). Studies 4 to 6 then generalize these findings, showing that the degree of competition also increases in the proximity of other meaningful standards, such as the bottom of a ranking scale or a qualitative threshold in the middle of a scale. Studies 7 and 8 further examine the psychological processes underlying this phenomenon and reveal that proximity to a standard exerts a direct impact on the basic unidirectional drive upward, beyond the established effects of commensurability and dimension relevance.