想象一下：你同时面试两个应聘者，他们的能力、资历与这份工作都相当，但一个人穿着H&M的衣服一个穿着路易威登。你会选哪个？
Imagine this: You're interviewing two people for a job.They're equally competent, capable, and qualified-but you can seethat one is wearing an outfit from H&M and the other's clothesare clearly from Louis Vuitton. Which candidate will you hire?
据韩国首尔的延世大学和卡罗莱纳海岸大学的学生们做了一个新研究，你有可能会选择后者。他们的研究主题是我们会对穿不同牌子的人有如何不同的反应。为了做这个研究，他们设定了几个不同情景，将研究对象分了两组：穿奢侈品牌和杂牌服饰。他们发现，几乎在所有情况下，人们都会对穿名牌的人给予特殊的优惠待遇。
A new study in the Journal of Business Research suggestsyou're more likely to choose the latter. Surveying students at alarge urban university in Seoul, South Korea, researchers fromYonsei University and Coastal Carolina University examined how wereact to others depending on the brands they're wearing. To do so,they tested several scenarios of someone wearing a luxury brandlogo, a logo from a non-luxury brand, or no logo. They found thatin nearly every situation, people gave preferential treatment tothe person wearing the luxury logo。
研究人员将这种效应称为高成本信号理论(costly signalingtheory)，意思是说人们通过外表的炫耀给人们他有钱这样做的信号。在这个例子中，穿着豪华品牌服饰的人在向周围人炫耀他们买得起奢侈品，也就能提高他在别人眼里的社会地位。
The researchers call this effect an example of costlysignaling theory, which says that people show off to "signal" toothers that they can afford to do so. In the case of luxury brands,the theory predicts that people wear expensive clothing to flauntthat they can afford it, thereby increasing their status in theeyes of others。
在第一种情景中，180位志愿者面前放了一名女子着白色Polo衫的照片，他们要根据照片评估她的财富值、社会地球、吸引力、可信度及其他品质。总共出现了三种不同的照片，唯一的区别就在于衣服上的品牌标识(奢侈品、一般牌子、无牌)。得出的结果是，穿奢侈品牌的女性在财富值和社会地位上要明显高于其他两类。
In the study's first scenario, 180 observers were shown apicture of a woman wearing a white polo shirt and asked to rate herwealth, status, attractiveness, trustworthiness, and othercharacteristics. Three versions of the picture were used, identicalexcept for the shirt's visible brand logo (luxury, non-luxury, ornone). The observers of the luxury logo rated the womansignificantly higher on wealth and status than did the observers ofthe non-luxury logo or no logo。
第二种情景，150名观察者要看一段一名女子应聘一个实习岗位的视频。同样的，其他的都一样唯一的区别就是穿的服装品牌。观察者们要对三个视频中的她进行许多品质的排序，不过这一次他们仍然觉得穿奢侈品牌让她看起来更适合这个岗位，认为这是她付出所应得的。这里的结果和上面的类似，穿奢侈品让他们对她的评估更高，认为她的社会地位和财富值更高。其后，观察者们还需要为穿不同衣服的她从五个阈值中选择时薪，超过一半的观察奢侈品牌的人选择了第1、2高的时薪，观察杂牌的人中只有12%(无牌的10%)做出同样选择。
In the second scenario, 150 observers watched a video of awoman being interviewed for an internship. Three versions of thevideo were used, again identical except for the logo on the woman'sshirt. The observers rated the woman on a number ofcharacteristics, but this time they also judged her suitability forthe job and the pay she should receive. Observers of the luxurylogo rated the woman most suitable for the job, again withsignificantly higher status and wealth ratings. The luxuryobservers also thought she deserved the highest compensation. Askedto choose her hourly pay from five ranges, over half of luxuryobservers chose one of the top two ranges-far greater than the 12%of non-luxury observers and 10% of no-logo observers who did thesame。
不过这个研究不意味着你要在下一次面试之前去商场挥霍，买一双Gucci鞋子。研究员们提出，这中间还有别的因素起了作用。
But this doesn't necessarily mean you should rush out andsplurge on Gucci shoes before your next job interview. Theresearchers caution that several additional factors are atwork。
第一，观察者们必须在没有别人提示的情况下自己注意到服饰牌子。如果穿戴者自己指出她穿的什么，那这个效应不成立了。而且，最重要的是，观察者至少该知道这个牌子才能在看到你穿的时候认出来。
For one, the observer must recognize the brand logo withoutassistance. If the wearer has to point out what she's wearing, theeffect is destroyed. And, of course, the observer must know thebrand to recognize it in the first place。
另一方面，怎么穿也会有影响。研究员说，如果观察的人本身很有钱，而你选择了花哨俗丽的衣服可能会适得其反。有钱人在判断一个人的社会地位时会比较微妙，把浮夸的外貌穿着视为“低级趣味”入不得眼。这时，便宜的品牌反而刚好符合这一点，在衣服上印着大大的标志，让买家招摇地显示衣服品牌。
For another, how someone wears the brand matters. Theresearchers say that a gaudy outfit will probably backfire withwealthy observers. Wealthy people tend to value subtlety in showingone's social standing, viewing "loud" displays of clothing as beingin bad taste. Cheaper designer items cater to the opposite impulse,often featuring large logos that allow their purchasers toconspicuously show off the brand。
招聘的过程中或多或少都会有歧视与偏见，现在我们可以把外表时尚也纳入其中了。
The hiring process is known to be fraught with biases-now itseems we can add fashion to the list too。
（声明：本文仅代表作者观点，不代表新浪网立场。）
