Individuals tend to compare themselves with others, and the results of these self-evaluations influence subsequent performance. When individuals perceive an advantage over their rivals (challenge-type response), they achieve higher levels of performance. According to the biopsychosocial model of challenge and threat, benefits of favourable appraisals are partly mediated by cardiovascular efficiency, which is increased by challenge and decreased by threat evaluations. In this study, we tested whether the biopsychosocial model can be extended to predict behavioural outcomes in esports. We expected that challenge-type evaluations would increase performance compared to threat-type evaluations. Eighty-two men were assigned to a challenge or threat group and completed three rounds of Counter-Strike: Global Offensive – a video game popular in esports. Individuals with the highest scores were awarded cash prizes. Cardiovascular markers of challenge and threat, cognitive appraisals, and game scores were recorded. We manipulated the social challenge and social threat evaluation by informing participants that their performance in the initial round was superior (challenge) or inferior (threat) compared with other gamers. We found that individuals with more gaming experience, believed they were better than other gamers, had higher heart rate and, in turn, achieved higher scores. These effects were related to initial situational appraisal at the baseline and were not boosted by feedback provided during the actual performance. These results are the first to document that social comparisons among gamers are accurate in the prediction of future physiological and behavioural outcomes. Furthermore, these findings emphasize that physiological responses mediate relationships between action-related cognitions and performance.

Experiencing an abundance of positive and negative emotions (emodiversity) can predict better outcomes than positive or negative emotions in separation. We tested whether state and trait emodiversity influence behavior in challenging social situations and whether this link is mediated by parasympathetic activation. Two hundred ten undergraduate students reported their emotions from the preceding month and were then randomly assigned to one of four movie-clip conditions: emodiverse (varied positive and negative emotions), positive emotions, negative emotions, or neutral. Afterward, participants engaged in an ultimatum game involving an uneven monetary split. They had to decide either to accept the offer, which would be a prosocial act financially benefit the proposer, or reject it, which would financially harm the proposer. Electrocardiogram, hemodynamic, and respiratory response were recorded continuously. We found that emodiversity, whether temporary or long-term, did not affect participants’ social decisions or physiological responses. Contrary to the emodiversity hypothesis, we found more straightforward effects. First, inducing negative emotions adversely affected participants’ affect and increased their likelihood of rejecting the offer. Second, participants with higher positive affect, greater parasympathetic activation, and faster breathing rates were more likely to accept the offer. In summary, we found little support for the proposed benefits of emodiversity. Instead, our findings highlighted well-established affective and physiological effects (i.e., parasympathetic activation), demonstrating that positive emotions were associated with increased prosocial behavior, whereas negative emotions reduced it. (PsycInfo Database Record (c) 2026 APA, all rights reserved)