
Economic status cues from clothes affect perceived competence from faces - DemiGuru
http://wws.princeton.edu/news-and-events/news/item/split-second-clothes-make-man-more-competent-eyes-others
======
d--b
It's nice that there's a study that confirms this, but it is pretty obvious
that people do judge other people from the way they look. Clothes is only part
of the mix. Skin color, gender, face shape, eye color, hair styling, general
posture, micro movements, smell, sweatiness, etc. also alter the way people
will categorize others.

And then once they speak, the way the voice sounds brings another massive
layer of pre-conceived judgment. Add social background, education, occupation,
sexual orientation, etc. In the end, all these elements will form an idea of
who a person may be.

Then this image erodes as one gets to know the other person.

------
rm_-rf_slash
Not surprised at all to see so many engineer-y types here on HN dismissing the
importance of clothing even the face of evidence. I used to be one, until I
saw _Kill La Kill._

Fact is, clothing has power. The ability to shape people’s perceptions of you
is valuable, and it can mean the difference between a deal and dismissal.

It can also have the adverse effect: wearing mismatching colors or patterns or
clothing of poor condition signals immediately to me that the wearer is either
unconcerned with their appearance or unable to distinguish between attractive
and unattractive aesthetics - a major red flag on my perception of their
judgement.

If someone wearing clothing like that works in tech I’ll spend 30 seconds
determining if they’re too much of a super-genius to be concerned with their
appearance (and if they truly are then they should acquire an identical
wardrobe, Jobs/Zuckerberg-style). Otherwise, I think to myself that if this
person is so lacking in perception to not comprehend how hideous they look,
then what other major blind spots do they have?

~~~
shard
For those of us who did not see _Kill_ _la_ _Kill_ , if it's not a major
spoiler, could you let us know what was it in that show that changed your
mind?

~~~
anotherman554
I'm smiling at the idea there's a lesson to be learned from Kill La Kill. It's
an anime where there's special clothing invented that gives you superpowers.
It's similar to saying you learned this lesson from the Spider-man villain,
Venom, or watching Iron-man movies.

I guess the above poster sees it as a metaphor.

------
swalsh
Makes me think of the Stephen Castor incident yesterday, and his use of a
reusable shopping bag to bring in documents to the impeachment hearing.

------
o09rdk
The clothing itself isn't really what I necessarily expected, if you look at
the pictures themselves ([https://osf.io/v2j43/](https://osf.io/v2j43/)). The
"rich" clothing is just more like "formal" or "conservative" clothing, and the
"poor" is more "casual". They seem to have tried to control for the formality
aspect but I'm not sure they did so completely (for example, there's still
blazers in the set with "formal" attire removed). I also suspect there's an
age dimension involved as well, in that some of the clothing is much more
likely to be worn by younger individuals than older individuals, or vice
versa.

Of course this will be correlated with wealth, because dressier clothes are
more expensive, and older individuals probably will have more wealth than when
they were younger. However, the clothing isn't the spectrum I was expecting
necessarily, and I'm not sure "rich" versus "poor" are the right labels.

Also, I can understand how most of the clothing came to be categorized the way
it was, some of it is confusing to me. There's definitely items that I think
would be classified in the other category. It would be nice to tailor this
more to specific individuals more.

To be honest I'm a bit surprised this is getting this much attention because
the social psychology literature is full of findings like this already.

~~~
Agenttin
It does seem to boil down to the idea that people in ties appear more
competent than people not in ties.

------
pnutjam
I believe this, my wife replaced my raggedy coat and I can see the first
impressions of people changed.

~~~
blablabla123
I can only confirm, since I started buying more expensive clothes (and
hardware), people seem to have a better impression of me. (Both in
professional and private life) It's kind of a waste though...

~~~
hoseja
It's waste by definition. It's social signalling. It's sort of like blockchain
proof of work, you show your commitment by displaying hard to fake wasted
resources.

~~~
criddell
Social signalling isn't necessarily a waste, especially if you have a very
high profile. When Justin Theroux shows up at an animal shelter and posts a
photo of some dogs on Instagram, those dogs get adopted and it raises the
profile of those animal shelters.

------
kingkawn
The most rigorous, controlling aesthetic of all is the one where you claim to
have none.

------
skilled
Thank God I am walking around with the most casual clothe possible and feeling
good about it. I can't imagine being part of any "circle" where clothing is
looked upon as a factor of who you truly are as a person. And by that, I mean
deeper than personality or character.

 _In the eyes of Others..._ Who are these Others? What makes us so different?

~~~
scrdhrt
People outside of HN and similar circles usually get impressed with shiny
things. "Regular people", most often in business situations, or with business
minded people. I run my own businesses and deal with a lot of this sort of
situations, but also with some family and acquaintances, normal folks.

Like it or not, I've most likely been referred and/or gotten deals through due
to my Omega Speedmaster, my Burberry winter coat, hade made expensive leather
shoes, etc. That sort of clothes and accessories. Because it makes me look
successful in the eyes of Others, and people wants to be friends and partners
with other successful people.

Shiny things/expensive clothings/etc = Seen as I must be competent to earn
that sort of cash.

My friends couldn't care less about what I wear, but they understand why I do
it.

~~~
jorvi
> Like it or not, I've most likely been referred and/or gotten deals through
> due to my Omega Speedmaster, my Burberry winter coat, hade made expensive
> leather shoes

I hate to break it to you (or maybe you will consider it a good thing), but no
one took the time to notice those minute details about you. Store bought
leather shoes that are well-polished look virtually identical to handmade.
Unless you hold your watch up to people their faces, few are gonna spot its an
Omega, let alone that the make is a Speedmaster (cheers btw, I love the
moonwatches).

People will spot that you take care of your appearance and try to go for a
sophisticated style, but beyond that few will notice the minutia.

Hell, I can do you one better: one time when I was at my parents for an
extended stay I decided to buzz most of my hair off whilst they were shopping.
I had pretty long hair. When they came back I had a conversation for a full
minute before my dad suddenly said 'wait.. what the hell did you do with your
hair?!'

~~~
crispyambulance
> Store bought leather shoes that are well-polished look virtually identical
> to handmade.

No, they're not. Shoes have a fairly broad spectrum of quality and style. Not
everyone notices and not everyone can tell, but it is something that many
evaluate.

Yes, it's a status signaling mechanism, but it is a part of culture whether
you like or not.

These kinds of evaluations happen not just with executives in suits but also
with youth and their ridiculous athletic shoes. Even gender-wise, women are
apt to notice minute details of shoes.

~~~
jorvi
> No, they're not. Shoes have a fairly broad spectrum of quality and style.
> Not everyone notices and not everyone can tell, but it is something that
> many evaluate.

Yes they are. Not in comfort or longevity, but as long as you don't completely
cheap out on store bought you will get _close_. You're conflating quality and
looks. They're related, but not synonymous.

> Yes, it's a status signaling mechanism, but it is a part of culture whether
> you like or not.

Which I never said. I merely pointed out that people look more to the style
package than what logos you wear. Hell, if you for example buy high tier Polo
Ralph Lauren the logo is often put on the _inside_ of the collar.

> These kinds of evaluations happen not just with executives in suits but also
> with youth and their ridiculous athletic shoes. Even gender-wise, women are
> apt to notice minute details of shoes

Few 21-year old women will care if their date is wearing flashy DCs, flashy
New Balance, or flashy Nike Air limited edition. You mentioned minute details:
for the Nike, how many of them would even be aware of the difference between a
limited edition, Nike ID or normal Laser Red batch? And dress shoes usually
don't even have visible logos!

------
kingkawn
This is because we are only steps removed from a feudal society

------
agent008t
Isn't the reverse true in HN circles? Where looking like Stallman implies
competency?

~~~
lazylizard
Or signaling that i can afford to not care about clothing

------
buboard
now i can pretend i am hiding something with my shitty dress code

------
Merrill
Most everyone can look "rich" with cheap imported knockoffs of expensive
clothing.

But peoples' choice of whether to dress "rich" or "poor" provides information
about them.

