“Lean on me, when you’re not strong,
And I’ll be your friend
I’ll help you carry on
For it won’t be long
‘Til I’m gonna need
Somebody to lean on”

Did you sing along while reading that? Bet you did. 

Bill Withers released “Lean On Me” back in 1972. Fifty years later, it features on Rolling Stone’s 500 Greatest Songs of All Time list and is heralded as the anthem of camaraderie. Why? Friends are and always have been an important part of our lives. As social animals, we thrive on and derive happiness from the relationships we cultivate. These relationships are also intricately linked to social status. 

Social status is the relative rank an individual holds in a constructed social hierarchy. The desire to improve and signal status permeates our society. We often read signals from potential friends, who give off certain signals, to decide if we want to engage in the friendship. 

An important way in which we signal status in today’s consumption-driven world is through the products and services we buy and consume. The common understanding is that a high-end or expensive purchase conveys that the individual is higher up in the social hierarchy. 

However, status and hierarchy are context-dependent and can thus, result in a difference in perspective between the two people embarking on the friendship. This can often lead to the Status Signals Paradox: the differences in perspective between people presenting information to others and the people evaluating information that’s presented. In other words, you might think driving your BMW is adding major brownie points to your status level when, in reality, people might be more likely to want to be friends with you if you drive a Honda.

An intercontinental team of researchers, Stephen M. Garcia, Kimberlee Weaver and Patricia Chen, explored the Status Signals Paradox through a series of studies. Let’s dive in.

Methodology: Studying Status Signals

Study 1: The Basic Effect. To confirm the existence of the paradox, the researchers recruited 125 main street shoppers. They were either assigned to two conditions: the presenters (people who would signal to make friends) or the evaluators (people who would read the signals and decide to be friends).

The participants in the presenter’s condition were asked:

“Imagine that you are going to an outdoor wedding party where you are hoping to make some new, close friends. If you owned a luxury car and a basic car, which car would you take to the party to make some new close friends: Basic Car or Luxury Car?”

The participants in the evaluator’s condition were asked:

“Imagine that you are going to an outdoor wedding party where you are hoping to make some new close friends. At the party, you notice someone who just arrived in a basic car (or luxury car).  

(a) To what extent would this person fit your ideal of a new close friend?, 

(b) How approachable would this person be?, 

(c) How likely would you be to start a conversation with this person?”

The results supported the existence of the paradox. Presenters think that high-status markers will help their efforts to make close friends more than neutral status markers, but ironically, these high-status markers actually hurt their efforts from the perspective of would-be friends.

Study 2: Examining the Mechanism of the Revealed Effect. The researchers sought to rule out counter-explanations (what participants say versus do and aesthetics) instead of status as the driver of the paradox.

What People Say vs. What they do

To confirm that the participants do as they said they will in Study 1, the researchers recruited 62 college students to participate in a study with monetary compensation. They were asked to choose a fellow participant from two presented profiles that included a few demographic information.

The participants prefered to interact with the individual who has neutral status signals rather than high-status signals. The results suggest that there’s no disparity in what people say and do with regards to the status signal paradox. 

Are Presenters Just Choosing Aesthetics?

To rule out the effect of aesthetics over that of status, the participants were asked to choose between plain white T-shirts that had the names of brands (Saks Fifth Avenue vs. Walmart) printed on them in plain black ink.

The results indicated that the effect emerges even when the beauty of the option is held constant and the only thing that varies is the status signal.

Study 3: Moderation by Signalling Goal. Although high-status signals don’t bring you any friends, are there other contexts when they are desirable? 

Study 3 tests the prediction that signalling status with the professional goal of making business contacts can be beneficial. The researchers recruited 251 participants and, again, assigned them to presenter’s and evaluator’s conditions. 

Presenters were asked whether they would drive to a wedding party in a basic car or a luxury car given two different goals: 1) to appear more competent in front of prospective business contacts or 2) to appear more likeable in front of prospective close friends. 

Evaluators were also presented with the two different goals but asked to choose who they would approach to accomplish each goal: drive of 1) a luxury car or 1) a basic car.

As predicted, a different pattern emerged for the presenters in the business context where the goal was to appear competent. At the same time, evaluators show a preference for a basic car over a luxury car driver in the friendship context, but that preference somewhat reverses in the business contact context.

The Results and Implications of the Status Signals Paradox on Consumer Decision-Making

Overall, the results indicate that the status signals paradox pervades people’s strategies to establish new friendships. This effect is driven by perspective. Differences in perspective between the actor and observer manifest in opposite social comparison-driven behaviors. Presenters are concerned with comparing favorably to others and, therefore, want to display high-status signals. However, evaluators also wish to be perceived as favorable themselves, leading them to shy away from disadvantageous comparisons.

This has robust implications in the consumer behavior world as signals are revealed through purchasing decisions. 

Your Pop Neuro Consumer Behavior Insights:

• Status is gleaned from purchasing decisions

• Friendships are driven by the subjective perception of status signals

• The perception of these signals is context-dependent

• High-end purchases signal competence while neutral signals demonstrate likeability

• Making business contacts and forming friendships require the use of different signals

• There exists a status signals paradox while making friends with the presenter of the signal wanting to choose more high-end signals and the evaluator choosing neutral signals.

This is an exclusive, members-only post. To get access to more posts like this, sign-up for the Consumer Behavior Insights Magazine here

References

Britannica: Social Status, https://www.britannica.com/topic/social-status

Garcia, S. M., Weaver, K., & Chen, P. (2019). The status signals paradox. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 10(5), 690-696. Retrieved from: http://www-personal.umich.edu/~smgarcia/pubs/Status_Signals_Paradox.pdf

Oprah Magazine: 30 Best Friend Songs that Celebrate your Special Relationship, Shelby Copeland, 2020

Rolling Stone: 500 Greatest Songs of All Time, 2003