- Research has long linked high socioeconomic status with better health and lower mortality.
- [A]...team of investigators...studied Baseball Hall of Fame inductees, Emmy Award winners, and former Presidents and Vice Presidents, comparing each to nominated losers in the same competition or election.
Findings:
- There were no consistent advantages for winners. The association between winning and longevity is sometimes positive, sometimes negative, and sometimes nonexistent,
- Emmy-winning actors enjoyed 2.7 more years of life than nominees who did not snag the trophy. Though Emmy-winning screenwriters were, mysteriously, at a 3-year disadvantage.
- Baseball Hall-of-Famers enjoyed no advantage in longevity over non-inducted nominees
- Presidents and Vice Presidents lose, on average, 5.3 years from their lives compared to the candidates they bested. While some of this is due to the impact of assassination, the disadvantage persists even when assassination is taken out of the equation.
Interpretations:
- ...the advantages and disadvantages of winning depend on the mix of opportunities and stresses that they bring.
- Winning an Emmy often leads to significant career opportunities that might not have been otherwise available.
- On the other hand, Baseball Hall of Fame induction occurs after playing careers are over and therefore has little bearing on career opportunities and earnings.
- As for presidential and vice presidential candidates, life circumstances do change for members of this elite club, but winning also brings significant risks: assassination threats and extreme stress from two of the world's most demanding jobs.
Reported on Science Daily. American Sociological Association (ASA) (2013, March 11). Does winning an Emmy, an election, or entry to the Baseball Hall of Fame
