« How can Mexican corn be left to rot? | Main | Overkill »
Counter-signaling bleg
I am looking for some salient examples of counter-signaling. The classic case is the rich man who dresses like a bum - he has no one he needs to please. Casual dress signals the very high level of his status and his absence of a boss. Of course this equilibrium is not always mimic-proof (e.g., virtually anyone can dress like a bum). This strategy works for the rich if only they have some other means of causing people to think they are very high-quality.
Top nerd programmers often don't wear ties. Truly beautiful women might deliberately dress down. Can you think of other plausible examples? Does counter-signaling work best when a person has already built up a mystique? Thanks in advance for any help you can offer...
Addendum: Here is my previous post on counter-signaling.
Posted by Tyler Cowen on July 18, 2006 at 02:45 AM in Economics | Permalink
Comments
I knew a Merrill-Lynch heir who drove a Checker.
Posted by: Dave Meleney at Jul 18, 2006 2:57:39 AM
The more energy a person puts into his uniform, the more useless he is.
Posted by: aaron at Jul 18, 2006 3:05:13 AM
The use of titles. Mid level executives are more likely to use their titles, e.g. on business cards, than more senior execs. Two examples -- I once worked at a small partnership. While most partners had the title 'Partner' after their name, the most senior did not, they had only thier name and the company name, just like the more junior, untitled staff. I once saw teh business card of a White House Chief of staff (I think it was Donald Regan) who likewise had only his name on the card.
Posted by: anon at Jul 18, 2006 3:57:24 AM
Top poker players will sometimes not look at their cards, and announce it to the table, if they believe they can outplay the other players just on reads.
Top NBA players (Allen Iverson) does a pretty good job of sending the "I'm that much better than you" signal by not attending practice.
Posted by: Joel W at Jul 18, 2006 4:09:21 AM
The British army. The top general wears an old sweater, the ones below him their regulation uniforms complete with scrambled eggs and fruit salad.
Posted by: Lars Smith at Jul 18, 2006 4:22:09 AM
Gen. Douglas MacArthur also dressed pretty shabbily during the peak of
his career. I would imagine that he did so for the same reasons as the boss
in your example. "I'm so good, I don't have to dress up."
Posted by: Student at Jul 18, 2006 4:29:54 AM
MacArthur was famous for never wearing any of his other medals except his stars. He was the most decorated soldier ever.
Bill Gates/Steve Jobs with their dress code...
i know a guy who drives around in ferarri, but almost always with flip flop and shorts and the cheapest Nokia phone. it's not until he get back to his car you realise that the ferarri shirt he's wearing is a real one.
Posted by: treespotter at Jul 18, 2006 4:32:47 AM
A Ferrari shirt? Totally naf.
Posted by: Lars Smith at Jul 18, 2006 4:38:44 AM
Scientists/engineers who are technically saavy & sophisticated who use small paper diaries/calenders rather than a PDA.
Posted by: Bio XX at Jul 18, 2006 4:43:10 AM
truly intelligent people do not brag or beat you in the head with
how much they are worth, but know that their achievements speak for
themselves.
I would not say this is counter-signalling, just no need to signal,
since the extreme value can be checked. Unlike a not-already accomplished
person, who needs to distinguish him/herself from the rest of
the crowd by signalling, somebody already at the top has a palpable
measure of his worth, which could be used if necessary, but it does not
need to be used. It does not need to be used because those who should be
aware of the value of the achievements are already aware.
Posted by: avm at Jul 18, 2006 5:10:27 AM
When I used to work in a corporate hq and we would visit, say, a regional office, I would dress down somewhat. Also, if we drove with a private car, we made sure it what was not showy.
I currently work in an organization that has its share of consultants running around in the building. They might want to consider counter signalling, as they stand-out by there dress alone. I realize that they have to abide by a dress code, but they might want to consider a more flexible one, one that allows them to adjust to their client and the project they are on.
Posted by: Martin at Jul 18, 2006 5:35:58 AM
Signaling itself is a counter signal, indicating the need to signal.
Posted by: aaron at Jul 18, 2006 5:38:21 AM
The seduction game, in which oftentimes a man needs to signal disinterest to the woman in order to get her to reveal that she might be interested, and in which signaling interest all too often leads to the woman losing interest in the man (the example also works if you replace "man" by "woman" above and vice versa).
The same thing occurs in politics, where often the candidate who seems the most reluctant to acquire power is the one that the people will want to elect most, precisely because he is not in solely because he wants power.
Posted by: Marc at Jul 18, 2006 6:10:00 AM
You need to read the book Class by Paul Fussell. Many of the class signals of the upper class are opposite of the class signals of the upper middle class.
Posted by: Half Sigma at Jul 18, 2006 6:30:46 AM
Smart people that use simple words rather than big words that convey the same message.
Posted by: Mo at Jul 18, 2006 6:41:18 AM
A famous case of a rich man's sartorial counter-signaling:
John Walton, the saintly and deceased Wal-mart scion, used to wear blue jeans almost everywhere. As a prominent philanthropist with an interest in doing the hard work of improving education, he was constantly being feted. Many of his supplicants would throw him galas for which he would arrive vastly underdressed. He would have to go to the nearest Wal-mart and buy a sports jacket! (Rumor had it he had the world's largest collection of W-m jackets...)
Posted by: c at Jul 18, 2006 7:13:51 AM
Amongst Western democracies it seems France is the only one that has big military parades.
The Emirates Economist: File under: All right to show your stuff as long as you are known to be impotent
Posted by: John B. Chilton at Jul 18, 2006 7:49:50 AM
Well, there's the old rule that when you're giving a talk, a self-deprecating preface is only OK once you're eminent enough that it will be taken as good-natured humility rather than an accurate assessment of your contribution.
Posted by: Julian Sanchez at Jul 18, 2006 7:50:08 AM
A few less obvious ones:
For a management consultant or an investment banker, being fit is generally a good signal. Very prominent ones, though, are often not in a very good shape (e.g., Bruce Wasserstein).
Many top mathematicians do not present (or even write down) proofs very formally or carefully. Being excessively formal is often a sign that the contribution isn't that great. I think it is less clear-cut in economics, where many not-so-top people are also very informal simply because they can't write formal proofs, but the effect is probably present as well.
Google founders drive cheap cars (Priuses) and live in apartments.
However, for all these examples (including dress code etc.) I do not see a clear empirical strategy for distinguishing between countersignaling (i.e., Bill Gates would dress up more formally in the absence of signalling effects) and simply having no or very little need for signaling since you are already very good (i.e., Bill Gates would dress up in exactly the same way or even less formally in the absence of signaling effects).
I do suspect, though, that Google founders, being red-blooded young males, would drive much more expensive and fun cars in the absence of signaling. Buying a house might simply be too much hassle for them, but buying a Porsche takes very little time.
Posted by: no at Jul 18, 2006 8:29:21 AM
Actually, almost every programmer who can get away with it eschews ties and fancy dress. It's part of the culture of programming. In fact, Silicon Valley culture is one of mass reverse-signalling. Respect in programming circles is nearly entirely around reputation and achievement, not traditional status symbols (at least at the office--the cars are frequently pretty nice, as are the gadgets and male-toys, like big screen TVs).
Wearing a suit is seen as admitting you're merely a management type and hence clueless as to technology. Bankers in Silicon valley took to dressing down when visiting tech firms in order to be taken seriously by the geek set.
Posted by: Sandy Smith at Jul 18, 2006 8:32:07 AM
An example from the world of mountain bike racing: the bike you ride. As racers progress through the ranks from beginner to sport to expert/pro, the value of the bike you use generally increases. However, very strong and experienced riders often seem then to graduate from a $7000 masterpiece (seriously: http://www.specialized.com/bc/SBCBkModel.jsp?sid=06SWorksMTB) to a heavy, fully rigid (no suspension), single speed (1 gear, not 27) bike.
Posted by: Mike Berry at Jul 18, 2006 8:42:55 AM
Harvard graduates who, when asked where they went to school, say "Up in Boston."
Posted by: Will Wilkinson at Jul 18, 2006 9:08:03 AM
I once came upon a very high class restaurant in the Berkshires that was in an old house. The sign outside was very small, and the parking almost nonexistant. Unfortunately, it is long gone. Not that it wasn't a success, but that keeping a secret like that requires occassional moves.
Another case is the Salt Lick BBQ outside Austin TX. It isn't really easy to find, and the sign, again, is small (on the order of a foot square).
Posted by: Paul McMahon at Jul 18, 2006 9:10:41 AM
Quantitative people in medical settings dress down because they want it known that they are doing it on horsepower, not credentials. (Also, the salary differential means that they couldn't compete with the docs on clothes if they tried.) However, I once attended a talk by an almost-famous biostatistician who showed up in cutoff jeans and a tee shirt. It was very clear that he was overdoing the signal, thus disclosing a need to signal. By the way, he is no longer even almost-famous.
Posted by: Bill Gardner at Jul 18, 2006 9:20:54 AM
Bad hand-writing.
Posted by: Yesim at Jul 18, 2006 9:21:57 AM
An article I wrote a few years ago on "Simplicity Chic: Conspicuous Non-consumption?" may be of relevant interest:
http://juliandavid.blogspot.com/2003_10_01_juliandavid_archive.html#106497536329114537
Posted by: Julian at Jul 18, 2006 9:23:26 AM
Most of the posters are male, as are the examples. My guess is that this plays differently with females. My physician/researcher wife reports trouble if she dresses down or doesn't wear her white coat. Subordinates -- particularly females -- often do not respect the authority of a woman who dresses down.
Posted by: Bill Gardner at Jul 18, 2006 9:26:46 AM
Harvard graduates who, when asked where they went to school, say "Up in Boston."
This seems like a good example, but I'm not sure -- I've done it myself, but I don't think it was "counter-signaling." Rather, it was because of the fact that in some situations, if you announce that you went to Harvard, other people give signs of intimidation that can be quite uncomfortable and awkward ("wow, you must be really smart, I just went to the community college myself"). Easier just to sidestep the whole issue.
Posted by: Stuart Buck at Jul 18, 2006 9:28:17 AM
I was at a restaurant lately were a young man was seated with a very attractive young woman he was obviously involved in a heterosexual relationship with. He was wearing a pair of shoes that have traditionally been considered feminine (mules). I would say the whole metrosexual movement is a form of counter signaling.
By the way, "Google founders drive cheap cars (Priuses) and live in apartments."
While the apartments may be counter-signaling, I would argue the Priuses are a very definite form of traditional signaling.
Posted by: Ted Craig at Jul 18, 2006 9:31:09 AM
Is intentional deception counter-signalling? If so, we see many examples in the world of poker. One of my favorites is that the stronger stereotype most decent players have is of the "young gun" type wearing sunglasses, a tee-shirt from an online poker site and his hat on backwards. The assumption is that such people are playing a part and are not particularly good. As such, I often choose to don such garb in an effort to project a weak image. It seems to work.
Posted by: Stephen D. Cohen at Jul 18, 2006 9:47:21 AM
Another example in vehicular terms involves people of modest income who nonethless feel compelled to drive expensive cars they can't really afford. Lease deals that allow for relatively low monthly payments make this form of "signalling" possible. Of course, many of the leases are otherwise financially inadvisable, often requiring substantial cap cost reductions and having unrealistically low mileage allowances, but they get people into cars they'd never be able to purchase. Cadillac Escalades are notorious for being driven by people who should be driving less-costly vehicles.
Posted by: Peter at Jul 18, 2006 9:49:17 AM
If you llive in Manhatten, never to have an umbrella because you always take cabs..
Posted by: Roland at Jul 18, 2006 9:54:14 AM
About hidden bars in LA from the movie Swingers:
Mike: For some reason the cool bars in Hollywood have to be hard to find and have no sign. It's kind a like a speak easy kind a thing. It's kind a cool it's like you're in on some kind a secret, you know. You tell a chick you been some place it's like bragging you know how to find it.
Posted by: Joel W at Jul 18, 2006 9:57:50 AM
Warren Buffet lives in a house he bought for $31500, dines on burgers and quotes Mae West.
Preferences or counter-signaling?
Hard sayin' not knowin'
Posted by: anonymous coward at Jul 18, 2006 10:13:26 AM
When I think of countersignalling, a brilliant former professor (Dr. Jones) comes to mind. During a seminar, he'd often start a question by scratching his head and saying "I'm sure this is me, because there's a lot of things I just don't get". Then he'd ask a very simple question in very simple language. Part of it was tactical (it's amazing how many speakers fell for it and treated him like he was an idiot).
This approach has become so well known among my peers that several generations of grad students from our program call this approach "pulling a Jones"
Assistant professors often try to aggressively signal by getting in people's faces, using phrases like "you must understand...", and using big words, OTOH, well established senior faculty tend to be more gracious and speak more cleanly, simply, and in a more down to earth style.
Posted by: The Unknown Professor at Jul 18, 2006 10:18:14 AM
I'd like to emphasize what some other commenters have said about Silicon Valley signaling: the clothes are counter-signaling (Sergey actually dresses even more casually than the median Google programmer) but there is plenty of traditional signaling expressed through ultra-cool, ultra-expensive nerd toys. Case in point: a few months ago a guy came to Google to give a talk on, and demo a prototype of, the new electric sports cars he was building and hoped soon to offer for sale. 0-60 in 3.0 sec, zero emissions, $100,000 each. He knew his target market very well indeed. :-)
Housing can go either way: some of the tech billionaires live frugally, some of them live like, well, Larry Ellison. Some I've heard of do a bit of both traditional- and counter-signaling: they have modest-sized, outwardly modest-looking houses in non-snobby areas which are decorated inside with interior fittings and furnishings of extraordinary quality.
Posted by: Nicholas Weininger at Jul 18, 2006 10:20:38 AM
Those people in Manhatten get screwed when it rains hard, because then everyone takes cabs so cabs aren't available.
Posted by: michael vassar at Jul 18, 2006 10:23:51 AM
michael, you beat me to it. i was going to suggest that roland -try- to find a cab when it's raining.
Posted by: will at Jul 18, 2006 10:34:07 AM
Does counter-signalling have to be deliberate? If so, I'm not convinced all of these are cases of counter-signalling, vs. not caring or even not knowing what the standard signals are. There may be an implicit confidence that other signals ("I am a good programmer") will carry the day but not necessarily any awareness of what's going on.
Or, rather than counter-signalling, there may be a confidence in *superior* forms of signalling, e.g. being able to demonstrate technical competence makes inferior signals such as tie-wearing obsolete.
Which isn't the same thing as being too rich to care about anyone's opinion, which gets back to my skepticism that these are all the same thing.
Posted by: Damien at Jul 18, 2006 10:41:07 AM
Church.
Why do so many people dress up for church?
If there is a god he/she/it can see right through...
Posted by: secular at Jul 18, 2006 10:44:28 AM
Using the google founders is a funny example, considering that they just bought a
767 for use as a "party-jet". (Complete with king-size beds.)
Posted by: Sameer Parekh at Jul 18, 2006 10:47:22 AM
In the Army, many of the most elite soldiers don't wear badges that let you know they're elite. I knew a guy who was HALO and SCUBA qualified yet never wore the badges.
Posted by: Geoff at Jul 18, 2006 10:50:27 AM
In Britain, medical students eventually qualify and then use the title "doctor" as in the US. But if they then go on to become surgeons they revert to "Mr". I'm not sure if this is really counter-signaling or just tradition from a couple of hundred years ago when surgeons were regarded as artisans and didn't pass through being a doctor at all.
Posted by: Paul at Jul 18, 2006 11:13:48 AM
At elite universities, students make a big show of how little effort that have to put forth to do well. The party culture at these schools is often a signal of how much study-free leisure time one has as much as it is a reaction to stress.
Also, it's well known in wealthy communities that the nouveau riche are typically the ones with the large, gaudy houses with polo field size lawns and heated driveways that can double as an emergency landing strip, whereas the more established old money families are much less flashy. But I'm not sure this is a form of counter signalling as much as an expression of the culture of those who have grown up around money and don't feel the need to prove anything.
Posted by: Joe at Jul 18, 2006 11:14:20 AM
"if you announce that you went to Harvard, other people give signs of intimidation that can be quite uncomfortable and awkward"
Luckily us University of Pennsylvnia graduates don't have that problem. People just think it's a state school.
Posted by: Half Sigma at Jul 18, 2006 11:21:07 AM
In his brilliant "Radical Chic", Tom Wolfe analyzed the behavior of the Park Ave smart set by way of the French concept of "nostalgie pour la boue", which translates literally as "nostalgia for the mud". The theory is that the upper classes, at least in Manhatten in the 1970s, were adopting the fashions and sensibilities of the lower classes to drive industrious good grey middle class burghers mad. It's counter signalling with a purpose: to overcome respectable bourgois values. Invite the Black Panters into your Park Avenue apartment...how...revolutionary...how...not middle class...
Posted by: Rue Des Quatre Vents at Jul 18, 2006 11:25:53 AM
This strategy works for the rich if only they have some other means of causing people to think they are very high-quality.
I find this statement puzzling, for the same reason that I think some of the examples are not signalling.
If you have some other means of establishing that you have an attribute then you don't need to signal. I thought the whole point of a signal was that it is costly, but its cost declines in the attribute being signalled. So offering a warranty on a used car you are selling costs you something, but the better shape the car is in the less it costs.
One idea mentioned that might fit is the idea of programmers dressing badly. That could signal, at the cost of being seen as a slob, that the programmer is not much concerned about money, but instead is deeply interested in computers and software, etc. This extends, maybe, to other cases where someone is trying to signal a personal value system that does not place much emphasis on consumption. Of course it only works in an environment, where consumption is highly valued.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov at Jul 18, 2006 11:26:41 AM
Willie Nelson often plays a beat up guitar (with a whole in it).
Posted by: vc at Jul 18, 2006 11:30:01 AM
This is more of the general "smart geeks dress down" to the point of it
almost being a mandatory dress code (male geeks anyway). During a session
on econophysics at the AEA a few years ago, physicist Doyne Farmer made fun
of economists for dressing in suits too much and bragged about how he and
all his physicist (and econophysicist) pals dressed down. It was clearly
put forward as part of the argument that the physicists were better at
doing economics than the economists. The economists were clearly like those
clueless overdressed bankers visiting high tech firms.
Regarding Sam Walton (and also the unmentioned Ray Kroc) there may have
been another element. Both of these men were known for sneaking around
in their dumpy clothes and cars to show up unannounced randomly at their
establishments (Kroc built up MacDonald's for any too young to remember)
for on-site inspections. Both had certain demands and standards that were
viewed as key to the success of their firms, and the threat of their random
on-site inspections helped enforce those standards.
Posted by: Barkley Rosser at Jul 18, 2006 11:34:51 AM
Stephen D. Cohen points out the "internet poker geek" look as showing that one is a weak player. I will say that this tactic was used successfully by Billy Hoyle (Woody Harrelson) in White Men Can't Jump (it also helped that he had the traditional signaling advantage of being white - imagine the hilarity if Sydney Dean (Wesley Snipes) had gone reverse Soul Man and painted himself white to counter-signal).
Of course, there has to be a balance - if too many people use the "counter-signaling" mechanism, doesn't the "counter-signal" then become a "traditional signal"? Such as with those in Silicon Valley or the programming industry (BTW: why do they have to be nerds?) in general - everyone knows that they dress down, so isn't that a "traditional signal"?
Posted by: AZ at Jul 18, 2006 12:04:02 PM
Some examples of interest:
Musashi arrived at his most famous duel with a wooden practice katana (and won). Rod Woodson, in his prime, never called for a fair catch on punt or kickoff returns. The message in each case: I'm very, very good -- and quietly berserk.
On the same lines: Academic bloggers. The message: "I got all the time in the world, dude." And more pointedly -- and with all due respect -- Economists who write about the 12-tone / ska fusion revival bands of East Timor, etc.: "I can publish about _anything_."
Posted by: Bill Gardner at Jul 18, 2006 12:11:33 PM
I always thought tech geeks dressed poorly not as a deliberate form of counter-signaling, but rather because they were too clueless to know any better.
Posted by: Peter at Jul 18, 2006 12:14:56 PM
Bruce Springsteen has played the same low-end Fender guitar for his entire recording career. But is he counter-signaling his guitar skills and his unwillingness to take a Springsteen Signature Edition guitar deal, or is it just the guitar he's used to playing?
Posted by: Don Marti at Jul 18, 2006 12:20:50 PM
Successful private equity investor who always takes the subway or LLIR to JFK (except when he's flying from Westchester ;-). He always insisted that it was faster than a private car.
Posted by: mike at Jul 18, 2006 12:23:46 PM
Don Marti: Using beat-up, old equipment is very popular amongst musicians (Paul McCartney, Sting, Stevie Ray Vaughn, the aforementioned Willie Nelson, and the list goes on) who could easily afford to have custom-made instruments. This is probably because of their comfort level with the instrument or for sentimental reasons more than any type of counter-signalling. Springsteen probably does so as a traditional signal, to show that he can be mentioned in the same breath as legitimate icons, that is to cover up for his vast back-catalog of musical evidence to the contrary. The same could be said for his early predilection for dressing like the Rolling Stones.
Posted by: D.Cous. at Jul 18, 2006 12:49:47 PM
As the saying goes: "Dime de que presumes y te dire de que careces"
Posted by: daa at Jul 18, 2006 12:51:10 PM
In the automotive/street racing scene, I've noticed that the fastest cars are often left to look like they are still factory, maybe with the only noticable upgrade being the wheels.
Posted by: ChristianCB at Jul 18, 2006 12:56:24 PM
What exactly is the definition of countersignaling anyway? Is it to signal that your are not signaling? Is it to signal the opposite of what you are supposed to be signaling?
Posted by: Mario Moreno "Cantinflas" at Jul 18, 2006 12:58:09 PM
I am a fashion industry related geek and I dress like crap. Am I countersignaling? Hell no, I just don't care. Not only do I not care, most of the designers and manufacturers I know don't care either. It's a good thing consumers do care, otherwise we'd be in worse shape than we are. Evidently, not only do the shoemaker's children have no shoes, they don't want them either.
Posted by: Kathleen Fasanella at Jul 18, 2006 1:05:39 PM
When I was still in college, I worked as a waiter at a 5 star restaurant in my hometown while on summer break. The restaurant was in a plain-looking white house and had no sign whatsoever, although its name appeared in frosted glass on the front door.
Posted by: Kyle S at Jul 18, 2006 1:19:30 PM
"This strategy works for the rich if only they have some other means of causing people to think they are very high-quality."
Someone above wrote they don't understand the above quote.
If a middle class guy drives an old Ford, people assume he's too poor to afford better so it lowers his class image.
But if someone who is obviously a multi-millionaire drives an old Ford (and many do), it signals that he's so secure in being rich that he doesn't have to show off by having an expensive care. This raises his class image among the old-money people, and he doens't really care what lower class or middle class think becuase they are completely off his social radar.
Posted by: Half Sigma at Jul 18, 2006 1:21:28 PM
George Bush on a ranch
Posted by: jwm22 at Jul 18, 2006 1:31:13 PM
Most of these examples are just status competitions where the competitors hit a ceiling in the arms race. We are a rich country. It's almost impossible for the upper class to outdress the upper-middle class in a way that's easily visible to function as a useful social signal.
The middle chase the upper middle who chase the rich up the social signal ladder. At some point a ceiling is hit so the rich change tactics. A brief period of confusion reigns before the lower classes realize the rich have jumped ladders. Then the process starts over again. Rinse and repeat.
A ceiling was hit on clothing a long time ago. The rich need to go to ever more exotic travel destinations, since the average American can afford the European highlight tour nowadays. Food snobbery has been a good source of class differentiation in recent decades.
How about teeth? Now that every American can have perfect, gleaming teeth, I want to see some rich guy purposefully mangle his teeth. Or just stop brushing for years. No mental illness allowed. A perfectly healthy adult who eschews the middle class dream of gleaming white teeth to signal he's so high in status he doesn't need good teeth.
Posted by: mike at Jul 18, 2006 1:43:47 PM
Really smart yet quirky economist asks readers for suggestions about quirky economic behavior.
Posted by: anony at Jul 18, 2006 1:52:01 PM
The whole "hipster glasses" thing--you know, the ones with the thick black frames that the guy from Weezer made so popular. It started out as a "dress like a nerd to be cool" thing, but ten years on, the original irony behind it has completely evaporated.
Posted by: Chris B. at Jul 18, 2006 2:06:56 PM
When preparing legal arguments, citing to a lot of cases generally means those cases are not all that good. Citing to a single source signals confidence in its authority and your interpretation of its relevance.
Posted by: Trevor at Jul 18, 2006 2:18:32 PM
Michael, Will, you are right, if you have no umbrella its because you have a driver and a car around the cornner..
Posted by: Roland at Jul 18, 2006 2:23:01 PM
oooh I got one! Matt Yglesias doesn't proofread his blog posts :)
Posted by: mk at Jul 18, 2006 2:26:29 PM
"Truly beautiful women might deliberately dress down."
I found that in college I needed to dress down so I could keep male interest at bay. Not that I was particularly beautiful, but guys, being what they are/(were)...
Anyway, as Marilu Henner said on Taxi (paraphrased), "the only thing dressing down does is attract a lower class of guy."
This is the truth, for what it's worth.
Posted by: InkyProse at Jul 18, 2006 2:32:19 PM
It's almost impossible for the upper class to outdress the upper-middle class in a way that's easily visible to function as a useful social signal.
Imagine a Tudor level of effort put into clothing while using modern technology.
It may be that the very rich aren't competing on clothing because no one has figured out an entertaining way to do it.
Posted by: Nancy Lebovitz at Jul 18, 2006 2:35:16 PM
Upon entering college (up in Minnesota) one of the first things I learned was that the faculty were NOT to be addressed as "professor" or "doctor."
How about those who append "Ph.D" or the like to their name on the covers of their books? They're not counter-signaling, but for me it works as a signal they don't intend to send -- "I'm insecure in my position" -- and usually with good reason.
Posted by: Harold at Jul 18, 2006 2:40:20 PM
But if someone who is obviously a multi-millionaire drives an old Ford (and many do), it signals that he's so secure in being rich that he doesn't have to show off by having an expensive care.
It could also mean that for security reasons, he's reluctant to draw attention to his wealth in such a public manner.
Posted by: Peter at Jul 18, 2006 2:42:08 PM
I loved the "Too Cool for School" paper, and thought their list of examples in the first two pages was quite salient. My favorite is the good friend who can kid you about attributes that would get a casual acquaintance punched in the nose (e.g., that you're fat, your momma dresses you funny, that you have no luck with women, etc.)
We should be careful, however, to distinguish countersignalling from deliberately "slumming." In countersignalling, there are really two signals: the one sent by the high types to separate them from the medium types, and the implicit one, sent without effort, that separates the high from the low types. The billionaire in first class can wear ratty clothes to distinguish him/her from the business traveler in the suit; anyone can observe, since he/she is in first class, that they're not a bum.
In slumming, the high types deliberately pool with the low types and MASK the secondary signal that distinguishes them from the middle types. This is lots of fun when going to bars (and BBQ restaurants).
I suppose there is a possibility of counter-slumming -- sort of like "putting on airs." Imagine a bunch of poorly-educated uncouth individuals dressing up in Armani suits to go to open houses for $5 million homes. They might succeed at first -- but their implicit signals (manners, etc) will give them away, which they might find very funny. Overcoming this, of course, is the basic plot of _Pygmalion_ and its subsequent adaptation.
I second the notion that _Class_ is an excellent read.
Posted by: ModalHubby at Jul 18, 2006 2:49:49 PM
Use of Dr. by Ph.D's (someone did mention titles previously).
IMHO, those confident in their ability as researchers never use Dr.
Posted by: chris at Jul 18, 2006 2:52:00 PM
I'm wondering if this whole "signalling" business is well-defined at all. As a few comments have suggested, how does one go about distinguishing counter-signalling from idiosyncratic tastes to, believe it or not, mere ignorance of what the proper signals ought to be.
@ Half Sigma:
Yeah, it's funny when people confuse the University of Chicago with the University of Illinois-somewhere. There are some students who are greatly offended by that confusion (among the general public, or others, I guess) and others who know the golden rule, "the people who matter know the UofC".
Maybe it is because of counter-signalling that the UofC, which has the second-highest tuition rate (after Columbia) of American universities, is in one of the worst areas of Chicago? (not Hyde Park itself, but the surrounding neighborhoods) Or maybe not...
Then again, maybe by asking these questions I'm signalling... or feigning signalling... is there any way to tell?
Posted by: Currence at Jul 18, 2006 3:10:03 PM
Public Choice professors (among other political/social science profs. of course) that love to declare that they don't vote because, by virtue of their Ph.D., they understand that votes at the margin don't matter. This stands in sharp contrast to "regular" people who seem to vote in order to signal social conscientiousness (why else wear "I voted" stickers?). The counter-signal is to show that one is "above the frey."
Posted by: Butter at Jul 18, 2006 3:53:18 PM
How all fashion designers only wear black (typically jeans or slacks and a t-shirt and perhaps a jacket). I always found that a little jarring given their career choices.
Posted by: bluto at Jul 18, 2006 3:58:01 PM
@ Half Sigma, Currence. So true. Compare "University of Chicago" and "University of Pennsylvania" to "THE Ohio State University"
Posted by: Trevor at Jul 18, 2006 4:05:06 PM
But if someone who is obviously a multi-millionaire drives an old Ford (and many do), it signals that he's so secure in being rich that he doesn't have to show off by having an expensive care. This raises his class image among the old-money people, and he doens't really care what lower class or middle class think becuase they are completely off his social radar.
Like some of the other examples, this confuses "signalling" with simply presenting an image. Signalling, as I understand it, is an effort to convey that one has a certain attribute in a situation where there is no other convenient way to announce it. If everyone knows you're rich then you don't signal that you're rich by driving a cheap car. You have no need to signal it at all.
Now, you might be signalling that you don't care much about personal consumption. This could be useful in some circumstances. Say someone wanted to earn your respect. They might be influenced by your signal to engage in philanthropic activity or do similar things rather than simply strive for financial success.
Posted by: Bernard Yomtov at Jul 18, 2006 4:20:48 PM
1. Stylish women wear less makeup, going for the natural look.
2. Very wealthy "old money" types don't dress in a flashy way, and they decorate their houses with tastefully faded rugs and furniture. (You can tell a nouveau household by all the flashy modern decor.)
Posted by: Clara at Jul 18, 2006 4:43:55 PM
"IMHO, those confident in their ability as researchers never use Dr."
Interesting. Are you trying to signal to _yourself_ that you are an elite researcher?
"THE Ohio State University"
Now that's just cruel...
Posted by: Bill Gardner at Jul 18, 2006 4:46:48 PM
WS: "You got to be rough to be with rich people. Gotta have money. You gotta be buying 'em presents an' everything all the time."
AMH: "Not at all. When rich people do something nice for you, you give them a pot of jam."
WS: "That's what pots of jam is for?"
AMH: "Orange. Grapefruit. Strawberry. But fancy. They have entire stores filled with fancy pots of jam wrapped in cloth."
--Anthony Michael Hall and Will Smith in "Six Degrees of Separation"
Posted by: Richard Bellamy at Jul 18, 2006 5:26:54 PM
David Dodge, governor of the Bank of Canada, crossbreeds cattle.
Posted by: true dough at Jul 18, 2006 5:27:19 PM
Similarly, extremely expensive/prestigious certain law firms (usually litigation boutiques) are known for casual dress in the office, on the same "I don't have to dress up" theory.
Posted by: Paul Gowder at Jul 18, 2006 5:48:20 PM
Compare this to, say, Levi's or even Tommy Hilfiger.
Posted by: Trieu Truong at Jul 18, 2006 5:54:47 PM
"Scientists/engineers who are technically saavy & sophisticated who use small paper diaries/calenders rather than a PDA."
Nah, that's just basic intelligence at work. PDA's overcomplicate life. Writing and reading in a paper calendar is easier and faster. High tech is not always the best tech.
Signed,
Computer Nerd
Posted by: Anonymous2 at Jul 18, 2006 9:49:40 PM
"How all fashion designers only wear black (typically jeans or slacks and a t-shirt and perhaps a jacket). I always found that a little jarring given their career choices."
Simplicity is a fashion. Black and white go anywhere, with anything. It's first order classy.
Posted by: Anonymous2 at Jul 18, 2006 9:53:11 PM
The years after Microsoft went public, programmers supposedly wore buttons emblazoned with the acronym "FYIV", which probably explained their reluctance to do anything other than whatever they felt like doing.
Posted by: Alan Brown at Jul 18, 2006 9:53:23 PM
"Smart people that use simple words rather than big words that convey the same message."
This isn't counter-signaling, this is communicating effectively.
In reference to all 3 of my comments, why do so many seem to believe that keeping things simple is not the end-result of intelligence? It's not counter-signaling. Complexity is oversold. Simplicity is sophistication.
Posted by: Anonymous2 at Jul 18, 2006 9:59:38 PM
"In the automotive/street racing scene, I've noticed that the fastest cars are often left to look like they are still factory, maybe with the only noticable upgrade being the wheels."
Some folks go farther than this. I knew a big money street racer, back in the '60s, who replaced one door on his Edsel station wagon with one off a different model and molded a set of fiberglass fenders deliberately carved and painted to look rusted out. He had a much-modified 427 side-oiler under the hood.
Such cars are usually referred to as sleepers, but the name Q-ship is also used. This references the German Navy's commerce raiders during the World Wars (others did it also but they made an art of it) which were merchant ships or ocean liners carrying cruiser-level armament.
Posted by: triticale at Jul 18, 2006 10:49:06 PM
I work in software, on the release team. I wear a tie the last two days of every seventh week, when we release the new version of our software. If anyone looks down on me for it, I haven't noticed, but sometimes coworkers unaware of my habit are surprised by it.
In general, I don't think the coder dress code is counter-signaling, in particular because the less impressive employees don't dress up (except for me, every seventh week). I think it's mostly preference, though there may be some cultural component - a programmer in a suit would stick out. But not counter-signaling.
Posted by: Steven Jens at Jul 18, 2006 11:41:51 PM
>Luckily us University of Pennsylvnia graduates don't have >that problem. People just think it's a state school.
Saying you went to Penn instead of dropping the Wharton.
Posted by: quitacet at Jul 18, 2006 11:42:07 PM
Paul Halmos said in his "automathography" that he noticed a difference in the way the faculty were addressed at the different universities he worked at during his career: the least reputable schools used the title Dr. since it couldn't be assumed that the instructors had PhDs; the average schools reverted to the standard Prof. title since their credentials were not in question but they wanted to distinguish themselves as faculty; and the elite schools (he used the University of Chicago as an example) simply referred to the faculty as Mr.
Posted by: Ben P. at Jul 19, 2006 12:52:41 AM
Anonymous2, using simple words is for clear communication, but not using simple words when they are adequate is a counter signal. It's meant to signal intelligence, but can singal an inablility to communicate clearly, a possible a lack of comprehension, and a need to signal.
I think, my definition of counter-signaling has become muddled.
By Tyler's examples, simple communication does look to be a counter-signal. Using big words or industry jargon is a signal usually needed to fit into groups. You must have status to move on to simple, effective communication.
Posted by: aaron at Jul 19, 2006 1:42:09 AM
Aaron, I disagree with "Using big words or industry jargon is a signal usually needed to fit into groups. You must have status to move on to simple, effective communication." Some people may think they need to do this, but they are usually wrong. My reaction to someone attempting this is WTF? I'm far more impressed with clear communication as it usually correlates with clear thinking. Status is gained with clear thinking and communication, among other things.
I work in software consulting, interacting with technical and non-technical people all day long, with a strong need to communicate effectively. Jargon can be effective with technical people, though not always. With both audiences, big words - though I could bestow my interlocution wtih them (haha) - are usually a hindrance.
Posted by: Anonymous2 at Jul 19, 2006 2:12:01 AM
I agree personally, but unfortunately I don't think that's how the rest of the world works. We are exceptions to the rule.
Part of it is that often what is being communicated really isn't that important. What the people are really judging you on is the signals you send that aren't directly related to the conversation. The real world is more about giving good sounding responses than actually giving good responses. It's not about being effective, it's about protecting the group, preserving the status quo, etc. I don't think it is uncommon for both parties of a conversation to have no clue what's going on (damn, I'm too young to be this cynical) or to have completely diffent perceptions of the conversation. But it usually doesn't matter either, the conversation is just a formality.
Posted by: aaron at Jul 19, 2006 9:16:54 AM
Ben P,
There is a further wiggle on this "Dr./Professor" thing. In the South it used to be that
more senior high school teachers would be referred to as "Professor." Hence, it was possible
to be a "Professor" without being a "Doctor." That has held over with more colleges and unis
in the South using "Doctor" on their campuses rather than "Professor," but I think Halmos was
mostly right, although these days I think the "Mr./Ms." has been replaced by simply using
first names.
Posted by: Barkley Rosser at Jul 19, 2006 10:27:51 AM
To clarify on Joel W's comment on Allen Iverson:
He was talking about Allen Iverson not attending practice. Not a game. Not the game he would die for. We talking 'bout practice.
Posted by: ian at Jul 19, 2006 11:29:49 AM
i think a bunch of the comments miss the obvious: often times, more expensive things are not better. you'd be hard pressed to find a better car than many subarus, much of the best food (e.g., vietnameese, good burgers) need not be (and often isn't) expensive, an old fender amp really does sound better than the most expensive new amp, you can get a better education at some states schools than far more expensive ivies, a bigger house is not necessarily more comfortable to live in than a medium-sized house, etc. so some of this is people just making sensible choices, choosing not to signal even though the have the means to do so. (i know, we can argue about whether the "best" car includes its signalling value, but by definition this discussion shouldn't consider that value, only utility in some narrow sense of the word (as car qua car or somesuch).)
Posted by: dj superflat at Jul 19, 2006 3:21:52 PM
No time to check it out now, but there is a pro photographer (I beleive he has done the SI swimsuit issue or part of it) who uses a cheap little P&S for his shots -- this contrasts nicely with jackasses like myself who suck at photography but blow what little money they have on ridiculous lenses.
Posted by: theCoach at Jul 19, 2006 3:36:28 PM
Successful pols do this all the time. George H.W. Bush said he like pork rinds, remember? And George W. claimed, after losing his first run for political office in Texas (during which he touted his Ivy League education), that he'd never get "out-dumbed" again. (I have also heard him use the word "shit". Seriously.)
Posted by: john at Jul 19, 2006 5:50:12 PM
Michael Kinsley suggested in this 2000 Slate piece that executives bragging about how much sleep they get, as opposed to how busy they are, was a type of signal or counter-signal. http://www.slate.com/id/76763/
Posted by: RH at Jul 19, 2006 8:03:02 PM
It's true that in street racing you can get more attention with a car completly stock looking that is very fast. The term for this kind of car is a sleeper. A good example i can remember seeing was an audi stationwagon blowing the doors off a dodge viper.
Posted by: Tyler H at Jul 19, 2006 10:57:54 PM
Geez Aaron, I don't know where and with who you spend your time, but it does seem to have made you cynical! What you describe is not common in my profession at all. Technical people will eat your lunch if you're trying to sound good rather than communicate well. Marketing people who hawk technical products, btw, don't count as technical people. They obviously are all about obfuscation.
Posted by: Anonymous2 at Jul 20, 2006 2:56:48 AM
Many of my students act stupid. I think they learned it from me.
Posted by: han meng at Jul 20, 2006 9:58:54 AM
Czech Republic's wealthiest man, Mr. Petr Kellner, is rarely seen in anything but black T-shirt. (I assume it's not still the same T-shirt.) Actually, he is rarely seen at all.
Posted by: PK at Jul 20, 2006 11:09:51 AM
"Top nerd programmers often don't wear ties."
Programmers only wear ties if forced. Anyone who wears one from free choice will get little respect from me and would bomb an interview unless he was brilliant.
Posted by: Noah Yetter at Jul 20, 2006 11:21:34 AM
Does this mean that ties can become a new form of counter-counter-signaling for programmers?
Posted by: Paul Gowder at Jul 20, 2006 12:31:47 PM
When I worked in the entertainment industry in Los Angeles, the top executives took pains to make sure they were more casually dressed than anyone else (down to the holes in the jeans). By contrast, the best dressed with usually either the mail room guys trying to work their way up, or the Admin Assistants (who were usually also georgeous).
Posted by: axooms at Jul 20, 2006 5:35:05 PM
While the norm at yale law school is to call professors by Professor Name, several of them ostentatiously go by Mr. Whoever. It's interesting because it deviates from the norm.
Posted by: yalie at Jul 20, 2006 7:24:08 PM
Anonymous2,
Government job.
Posted by: aaron at Jul 22, 2006 7:33:49 AM
You're right that countersignalling needs a context. You do need to have established a reputation, because countersignalling at its essense is making other people do your signallign for you. It works best when the act of countersignalling flouts rules or conventions- If you're wearing ripped jeans and sandals in a coat-and-tie steakhouse, the fact that manangement hasn't kicked you out signals to everyone else that you're so high up on the scales that the rules don't apply to you. The normal rules of signalling still apply- a fake countersignal is still prohibitively costly to fake, because if you lack the necessary status, people will apply the normal rules of dress and decorum to you.
Posted by: Matt at Jul 23, 2006 2:52:35 PM
George W. Bush. A man that used to be well spoken when running governor of Texas and now speaks less eloquently. He grew up with a silver spoon in his mouth and now speaks like a cowboy. Ultimate counter-signal!
Posted by: Nathan at Jul 24, 2006 4:54:58 AM
Dr. Johnson: "All censure of a man's self is oblique praise. It is in order to shew how much he can spare."
Posted by: Felix at Jul 26, 2006 8:17:49 PM
best lovely site!
http://www.accim.org/wboard/messages/4759.html#cheapviagra
[url=http://www.accim.org/wboard/messages/4759.html#cheapviagra]cheap viagra[/url]
cheap viagra
Posted by: cheap viagra at Aug 11, 2006 7:16:27 PM
like your job!
http://webadmin.tuke.sk/HyperNews/get/linalg/200.html#genericviagra
[url=http://webadmin.tuke.sk/HyperNews/get/linalg/200.html#genericviagra]generic viagra[/url]
generic viagra
Posted by: generic viagra at Aug 13, 2006 12:27:02 AM
like your job!
http://www.powerdesigners.com/InfoWeb/forums/drive/posts/1443.html#cialisonline
[url=http://www.powerdesigners.com/InfoWeb/forums/drive/posts/1443.html#cialisonline]cialis online[/url]
cialis online
Posted by: cialis online at Aug 13, 2006 1:53:21 AM
best lovely site!
http://www.accim.org/wboard/messages/4929.html#genericcialis
[url=http://www.accim.org/wboard/messages/4929.html#genericcialis]generic cialis[/url]
generic cialis
Posted by: generic cialis at Aug 13, 2006 5:01:51 AM
baas schoolmeisje ^^^ wonderbaarlijk tiener ^^^ sborrate filmati ^^^ capo giovane ^^^ bisexuel videos ^^^ sans esprit asiatique trou du cul ^^^ nenes vingt deux ^^^ pere setale ^^^ stupefacente studentessa figa fotti ^^^ sentimento cameriera ubriache ^^^ osaker snut asna till mun ^^^ osynlig asiatisk striptease ^^^ fresco fighetta gruppo ^^^ amichevole studentessa fotti ^^^ baise minou spritzen ^^^ fellations geile furche ^^^ naken naulakko peraaukon ^^^ pornosexcom portto ematin ^^^ svak sonn ^^^ kjoligst vagal mamma ^^^ mannlig fyldig ^^^ kald anselig jomfru ^^^ mathitria magoulo piomenos ^^^ proktiko fotografia ^^^ le plus frais papa photos ^^^ avaleuse en rut ^^^ pio drosero apofasistikos mpampas ^^^ to pio drosero apofasistikos mpampas ^^^
Posted by: levan at Sep 11, 2006 3:36:44 AM
I think what you are doing is great!!! I want to use your color scheme at my sites...
Posted by: Carri at Jun 2, 2007 12:35:09 PM
The Manolo recently posted about a related phenomenon, "The Paradox of Not Caring." Here is the link:
http://shoeblogs.com/wordpress/2007/07/06/ron-pauls-disgraceful-shoes-redux/
Posted by: Timothy at Jul 6, 2007 10:20:02 PM
