The Lowdown on Being at the Top

The notion has been supported by everyone from economists pondering human motivation to ethologists studying yellow baboons: Life at the top of the pack, with its abundance of sundry pleasures, is less stressful than life at the bottom. Seems a given. However, studies of animals living in social groups are challenging the assumption.

The most striking findings come from Scott and Nancy Creel, behavioral ecologists at New York City’s Rockefeller University. Earlier this year, the Creels concluded a two-year study of dwarf mongooses (animals about half the size of a squirrel) and African wild dogs. They found that stress-related hormones were up to twice as high in dominant mongooses and dogs.

It’s easy to see how science concluded that subordinate animals were more stressed. Early research, done mostly in the 1950s and ‘60s, was based on studying animals caged with dominant ones. In their natural habitat, these lower-ranking animals might simply shuffle out of the way of their superiors, but in a cage they could not escape; thus their relatively high levels of stress-related hormones.

So is the animal kingdom confirming complaints about stress that emanate from managerial suites? Is life really tougher at the top? Permit us the unscientific observation that for humans it may be tough staying on top, but it’s a lot harder trying to get there, mongoose or no mongoose.