Making friends is critical to well-being. We also live in a society where the display of status is ubiquitous and billions of dollars are spent on high-status consumer goods. In the present analysis, we introduce the Status Signals Paradox: When making new friends, people tend to think that displaying high-status markers of themselves (e.g., a BMW, a Tag Heuer watch) will make them more attractive to others than neutral markers (e.g., a Honda, a generic brand watch); however, from the perspective of would-be friends, individuals who display high-status markers are found to be less attractive as new friends than those with neutral status markers. Six studies provide converging evidence of the status signals paradox.
BergerJ.HeathC. (2007). Where consumers diverge from others: Identity signaling and product domains. Journal of Consumer Research, 34, 121–134.
2.
CharlesK. K.HurstE.RoussanovN. (2009). Conspicuous consumption and race. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 124, 425–467.
3.
ChenP.MyersC. G.KopelmanS.GarciaS. M. (2012). The hierarchical face: Higher rankings lead to less cooperative looks. Journal of Applied Psychology, 97, 479–486.
4.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
5.
De BottonA. (2008). Status anxiety. New York, NY: Vintage.
6.
DoobA. N.GrossA. E. (1968). Status of frustrator as an inhibitor of horn-honking responses. Journal of Social Psychology, 76, 213–218.
7.
ExlineJ. J.LobelM. (1999). The perils of outperformance: Sensitivity about being the target of a threatening upward comparison. Psychological Bulletin, 125, 307–337.
8.
FestingerL. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7, 117–140.
9.
FrankR. H. (2010). Luxury fever: Weighing the cost of excess. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
10.
GarciaS. M.TorA.SchiffT. (2013). The psychology of competition: A social comparison perspective. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 8, 634–650.
11.
GoldsmithR. E.ClarkR. A.LaffertyB. A. (2005). Tendency to conform: A new measure and its relationship to psychological reactance. Psychological Reports, 96, 591–594.
12.
HouseJ. S.LandisK. R.UmbersonD. (1988). Social relationships and health. Science, 241, 540–545.
13.
HuddersL.PandelaereM. (2013). Indulging the self positive consequences of luxury consumption. In WiedmannK.HennigsN. (Eds.), Luxury marketing (pp. 119–137). New York, NY: Springer.
14.
JohnsonC. (2012). Behavioral responses to threatening social comparisons: From dastardly deeds to rising above. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 6, 515–524.
15.
LeeJ.ShrumL. J. (2012). Conspicuous consumption versus charitable behavior in response to social exclusion: A differential needs explanation. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 530–544.
16.
MeadN. L.BaumeisterR. F.StillmanT. F.RawnC. D.VohsK. D. (2011). Social exclusion causes people to spend and consume strategically in the service of affiliation. Journal of Consumer Research, 37, 902–919.
17.
MullerD.BushmanB. J.SubraB.CeauxE. (2012). Are people more aggressive when they are worse off or better off than others?Social Psychological and Personality Science, 3, 755–760.
18.
MullerD.FayantM. P. (2010). On being exposed to superior others: Consequences of self-threatening upward social comparisons. Social and Personality Psychology Compass, 4, 621–634.
19.
PiacentiniM.MailerG. (2004). Symbolic consumption in teenagers’ clothing choices. Journal of Consumer Behaviour, 3, 251–262.
20.
PlebanR.TesserA. (1981). The effects of relevance and quality of another’s performance on interpersonal closeness. Social Psychology Quarterly, 44, 278–285.
21.
PodolnyJ. M. (2010). Status signals: A sociological study of market competition. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
22.
PutnamR. D. (2001). Bowling alone. New York, NY: Simon & Schuster.
23.
RathT.HarterJ. (2010). Wellbeing: The five essential elements. New York, NY: Gallup Press.
24.
RijsmanJ. B. (1974). Factors in social comparison of performance influencing actual performance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 4, 279–311.
25.
RossL.WardA. (1996). Naïve realism in everyday life: Implications for social conflict and misunderstanding. In BrownT.ReedR. S.TurielE. (Eds.), Values and knowledge (pp. 103–135). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
26.
SantorD. A.MesserveyD.KusumakarV. (2000). Measuring peer pressure, popularity, and conformity in adolescent boys and girls: Predicting school performance, sexual attitudes, and substance abuse. Journal of Youth and Adolescence, 29, 163–182.
27.
SnyderC. R.FromkinH. L. (1980). Uniqueness: The human pursuit of difference. New York, NY: Plenum.
28.
TesserA. (1988). Toward a self-evaluation maintenance model of social behavior. Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 21, 181–228.
29.
TesserA.CampbellJ. (1982). Self-evaluation maintenance and the perception of friends and strangers. Journal of Personality, 50, 261–279.
30.
TesserA.CampbellJ.SmithM. (1984). Friendship choice and performance:Self-evaluation maintenance in children. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 46, 561–574.
31.
TesserA.MillarM.MooreJ. (1988). Some affective consequences of social comparison and reflection processes: The pain and pleasure of being close. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 49–61.
32.
UmbersonD.MontezJ. K. (2010). Social relationships and health: A flashpoint for health policy. Journal of Health and Social Behavior, 51 (Suppl): S54–S66.
33.
VanVoorhisC. R. W.MorganB. L. (2007). Understanding power and rules of thumb for determining sample sizes. Tutorials in Quantitative Methods for Psychology, 3, 43–50.
34.
VeblenT. (1899). The preconceptions of economic science. Quarterly Journal of Economics, 13, 396–426.
35.
WanE. W.XuJ.DingY. (2014). To be or not to be unique? The effect of social exclusion on consumer choice. Journal of Consumer Research, 40, 1109–1122.
36.
WeaverK.GarciaS. M.SchwarzN. (2012). The presenter’s paradox. Journal of Consumer Research, 39, 445–460.
37.
ZuckermanE. W.JostJ. T. (2001). What makes you think you’re so popular? Self-evaluation maintenance and the subjective side of the “friendship paradox.”Social Psychology Quarterly, 64, 207–223.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
