Thoughts on "virtue signaling".

What does virtue signaling do? Virtue signaling is often derided as inauthentic, or too easy. Neil, however has defended it on evolutionary grounds, as signaling is very common 1/ https://aeon.co/ideas/is-virtue-signalling-a-perversion-of-morality

I agree with Neil that virtue signaling needs to be seen in the broader evolutionary context of signaling, but I find the choice of the peacock as a starting point. Neil talks about costly signaling and credibility enhancing displays, but I think virtue signaling is neither 2/

Virtue signaling is not the equivalent of the peacock tail, a cumbersome, difficult, and hard-to-fake sign of fitness. It's also not clearly a credibility-enhancing display as some religious displays are. Indeed, virtue signaling is cheap. This is what people have against it 3/

As @KevinZollman and colleagues point out in this paper, it would be very wasteful if all our signaling was expensive
"at equilibrium signals can be so costly that all involved would be better off simply not communicating". 4/

https://royalsocietypublishing.org/doi/10.1098/rspb.2012.1878

That would make coordination about common causes paradoxically more difficult, because lots of people would not be able to afford to signal cooperative intent. They would lack time, energy, resources to do it, and so would remain silent 5/

Imagine, for instance that in order to reliably signal "I am in favor of rights for refugees" you'd need to go and volunteer in war-torn areas, or steer a ship on the mediterranean to save refugees, etc (very expensive signals). Not many would be able or willing to do it 6/

But now, you can also signal more cheaply that you are e.g., not okay with mass hysterectomies being performed on detained refugees by reposting an article on it. Now it might strike one as too easy, but such signals are valuable as they signal how you stand on these matters 7/

For @KevinZollman and colleagues virtue signaling might be part of "a partially informative signalling equilibrium."
Virtue signaling has value insofar as it does signal one's intent and values. For instance, people who share articles condemning JK Rowling's latest novel 8/

Well, you've thereby signaled that you are not okay with Rowling's anti-trans stance. It's a cheap signal, but it still is honest. E.g., when I wrote on my wall a while ago I didn't want to host TERF discussions I lost a lot of followers (who think "TERF" is a slur). 9/

And I will almost certainly lose some followers because of the tweet above. So, the signal is cheap (though not cost-less) but there is no reason for me to lie about how I stand on this, so the signal is also reliable. A lot of virtue signaling works this way 10/

Virtue signaling helps people to coordinate better, by publicly displaying where they stand on a particular matter (e.g., abortion, refugee rights, trans rights).
Virtue signaling is *not* meant to display your personal virtue. That's a misunderstanding of what it does 11/

It is not very impressive to just report articles expressing outrage about e.g., JK Rowling's anti-trans stance. You haven't thereby done anything. You've just signaled to others, potentially like you, that you have those beliefs. That, by itself is very powerful 12/

As a host of studies have shown, people are powerfully influenced in voting and other attitudes by their perception of what other people think. Social norms and group influence are very important in affecting change 13/
See here: http://www.betsylevypaluck.com/research 

Suppose that no-one expressed outrage about refugees undergoing involuntary hysterectomies. Then people, whose beliefs about what's morally okay are influenced by what others think or by group norms, start to wonder: why aren't people outraged? Maybe it's okay after all? 14/

But thanks to cheap virtue signaling, you know you are not alone, even when e.g., the bigger society seems to have accepted some things as normal. That helps you to coordinate action with like-minded individuals, and eventually, that can lead to genuine change 15/

For work on how important coordination is and the role of signaling see
https://press.princeton.edu/books/hardcover/9780691154954/meeting-at-grand-central
and
https://press.princeton.edu/books/paperback/9780691158280/rational-ritual 16/

(just quickly in response to some comments upthread).
We might find the dynamics of virtue signaling regrettable. It would be better if society were less polarized. I don't disagree.
Signals can be adaptive even if the overall state of affairs is less adaptive as a result 17/

But given where we are, in societies that are polarized along several faultlines and these polarizations have real-world consequences (through voting, policies etc), virtue signaling is almost inevitable. If you don't VS you can't coordinate action, 18/

And if you can't coordinate action, then you can't successfully counter others whose interests don't align well with yours.
In an ideal world, we would not need yard signs like these.
But given where we are, such signs are helpful in coordinating action /fin