I can remember pitying my first fashion victims, way back when I was in university and Izod polo shirts were the big thing. My t-shirts and flannel shirts weren’t much, I thought, but at least I wasn’t paying extra for a stupid cartoon crocodile.
Yet one more thing I was wrong about. It turns out that wearing designer labels is an effective social strategy. It makes people think you have high status, and probably gives you access to better jobs and more money.
Rob M.A. Nelissen and Marijn H.C. Meijers of Tilburg University in the Netherlands drew these conclusions after looking at how people reacted to Lacoste and Tommy Hilfiger designer clothes, in a study in this month’s Evolution and Human Behavior.
Those wearing designer clothes were judged as wealthier and of higher status than no-logo counterparts. Other people were more willing to cooperate with them, to donate to their charities, and to recommend them for jobs.
The results fit in perfectly with the researchers’ theory that luxury items serve as “costly signals” to others.
The best-known example of a costly signal is the peacock’s tail. A costly signal advertises the fact that the individual is so fit that he can afford to waste resources, either on overgrown tail feathers or an overpriced polo shirt. Even a relatively modest costly signal will do the trick — that little crocodile advertises that the wearer was willing and able to spend twice as much on a piece of clothing as he needed to.
In the first experiment subjects were shown pictures of a man wearing a polo shirt. The photo was digitally altered to include no logo, a designer logo, or the non-luxury Slazenger logo. When he had on his logo, people rated the man as having higher status and wealth.
But did this perception affect actual behavior? Yes. A woman asking people to fill out surveys in a mall got a higher response rate when she wore a designer logo (52 percent vs. 13 percent).
A man taking a job interview was thought to have higher qualifications — and to deserve a higher salary — when he wore a designer logo. Even people collecting for charity got more contributions when wearing designer logos.
One tenet of costly signalling theory is that the signal has to be an honest one — one that really shows that a cost was involved in sending the signal. And this held true — a person wearing a designer shirt that others knew had been given to him by the experimenters was judged just as if he or she had no logo at all.
The research suggests that the advantages of designer clothes could be substantial — better job prospects, and greater trust, respect and consideration in most social interactions. The cumulative benefits over a lifetime could be enormous.
The benefits of t-shirts and flannel? Not so much.
Tags: costly signalling theory, designer clothes, Hilfiger, Lacoste, status displays
In modern business it’s not at all the crook that’s to become feared most, oahu is the honest man who doesn’t understand what he could be doing.
Don’t trust people. These are able to greatness.