Virtue signalling

Virtue signalling (or virtue signaling in American English ) is the conspicuous expression of one's moral values. The idea draws heavily from signaling theory in evolutionary biology, which posits that animals (including humans) can ascertain information about others based on traits of behaviors of said other. Virtue signaling also has roots in both psychology, via emotional signaling and social referencing, and economics, via contract theory. The origination of the term is credited to journalist James Bartholomew from an article in The Spectator in 2015. The phrase has been criticized by a number of journalists internationally as being hypocritical, and its use continues to be a point of contention in pop culture today. Given the relatively novel nature of the term, there have been few scientific studies addressing virtue signaling, or books describing the topic sans Geoffrey Miller's 2019 collection of essays, Virtue Signaling: Essays on Darwinian Politics and Free Speech.

Signaling Theory

Academically, the concept of virtue signaling stems from the signaling theories used in evolutionary biology, psychology, and economics.

In Evolutionary Biology

Charles Darwin and Evolution by Sexual Selection

The impressive plumage of peacocks is a common example of a sexually-selected trait and an honest signal to potential mates.

The idea of virtue signaling originates in part from the scientific study of signaling theory, initially conceived by Charles Darwin and his work, The Descent of Man, and Selection in Relation to Sex, published in 1871. In this book, Darwin speaks to the idea of evolution by sexual selection, which posits that certain traits arise and are maintained in a species due to their ability to attract mates and therefore increase overall fitness, even when these traits would otherwise decrease an organism's relative fitness. Darwin suggested that a number of traits persisted in species simply due to a preference for that trait by the opposite sex. Common examples of the Darwinian explanation for certain traits include (but are not limited to):

• Bird coloration: In many species of birds, namely the Galapagos finches studied by Darwin, males are typically bright in color. According to a strict Darwinian view, brightly colored males are preferred by females of their species over comparatively dull males. As an effect, brighter males are allotted more copulatory opportunities, which passes along to the next generation the genes denoting bright color. The preference for brightly colored males effectively removes the comparatively dull males from the mating pool, therefore resulting in an evolved population of birds with brightly colored males.
• Antler size: In deer, males have antlers which typically vary in size, and those males with larger antlers are able to obtain more mates. The Darwinian view suggests that females simply prefer males with larger antlers, resulting in these males to be given a greater number of opportunities to pass along his genes. Therefore, the genes for large antlers are passed down to subsequent generations and the resulting population consists of males with large antlers and females with a preference for large antlers.
• Peacock feathers: The Darwinian view on peacock tails suggests that females prefer males with brighter and more intricate feather displays. The males with the most impressive displays would attract more females and obtain more mates, again resulting in the persistence of this trait onto subsequent generations.

Amotz Zahavi and the Handicap Principle

Building off of Darwin's idea of sexual selection, Amotz Zahavi published a paper in 1975 entitled Mate Selection - the Selection for a Handicap in which he proposed an answer to the question of why sexually selected traits would persist in a population, given their obvious fitness costs. Zahavi suggested that the reason for the persistence of traits that seem as though they would negatively impact fitness was because of what these traits signaled to potential mates about the quality of the bearer. This became known as the handicap principle.

In the examples above, the handicap principle provides a reason as to why these traits would persist. For example, brightly colored male birds handicap themselves by being easier to for predators to detect. However, birds that are able to produce such colors must be able to do so because of their possession of a surplus of developmental resources after all other evolutionary necessities have been met. In other words, genetically inferior males would not be able to meet all of the developmental needs and still be able to produce a bright color. In this way, brightly colored male birds are signaling their quality to females via the color handicap. The same is true for the antlers of male deer (negatively impacts mobility to escape predators) and the feathers of a peacock (negatively impacts mobility, makes it easier to be detected by predators, etc.). In all examples, the handicap provides an honest signal to mates regarding the genetic quality of the trait-bearer, which makes the traits highly attractive in the mating market. This animal-centric view of signaling theory has been accepted as applicable to human behavior, though signaling theorists have been simultaneously criticized for being too reliant on the handicap principle as a sole explanation for reliable honest signals in human linguistic communication.

In Psychology

Signaling has myriad applications in psychological fields, spanning across social, cognitive, evolutionary, and developmental psychology. Psychologists in these fields primarily study signaling as it pertains to emotion and how emotional signaling affects social relations. Numerous studies have been conducted specifically on infants and the relation between signaling theory and social referencing.

Emotional Signaling and Social Referencing

A picture of a mother and her child using the visual cliff apparatus.

Studies of infant development have shown that infants use social referencing via maternal signaling to obtain information in the presence of situational ambiguity. One study used the visual cliff experimental paradigm to assess an infant's ability to perceive information from its mother. In the visual cliff design, infants are placed on a lifted, crib-like platform in which a portion of the floor is comprised of plexiglass, allowing the infant to see what it perceives to be a significant drop to the floor. This effectively creates the illusion of a "visual cliff." Originally created to test depth perception in developing infants, the visual cliff has been used in more recent years in conjunction with emotional signaling; children see their mothers expressing either positive (happy) or negative (sad) emotion, which subsequently affects the infant's willingness to take the risk by crawling over the plexiglass toward its parent. Studies such as this one suggest that emotional signaling is a useful tool in social learning and social decision-making from an early age.

This is further evidenced through the proposed evolutionary purpose of external emotional indicators such as tears. One study suggests that tears exist as an biologically evolved signal of sadness. This signaling conveys to others information regarding one's internal emotional state that might otherwise be difficult to ascertain. In this way, crying could have evolved as an honest indicator and external expression of sadness. This argument speaks to the strength of signaling as a social tool, allowing humans to silently and honestly convey information to others.

Additionally, at least one evolutionary psychological study has suggested that signaling can potentially help to explain risk-taking behavior. A 2009 paper found a highly sex-specific tendency for men to disproportionately partake in risky behaviors when they knew that such behaviors were being observed by women. This suggests that perhaps risk-taking could be an evolved behavior, and signals specific characteristics of the risky male to potential female suitors.

In Economics

Contract Theory

Michael Spence is credited with originating signaling in the field of economics via contract theory. Contract theory suggests that economic actors (sometimes referred to as agents) tend to enter into some sort of contractual obligation or mutual agreement when confronted with asymmetrical information. An actor can be a business, an individual, a corporate entity, or any number of parties which influence the economy. As it applies to contract theory, signaling is used by one actor to surmise information about another actor when asymmetrical information is available between the two parties. Some examples are:

• An individual searching for a job may not know much information about the companies to which he or she is applying, nor does the company likely know information about the applicant. To remedy this asymmetrical information, an applicant might provide a resumé or CV, which serves as a signal of the applicant's quality as an employee. This is an example of the job-market-signaling model provided by Michael Spence in the 1970s.
• Similarly, a bank with impressive architecture might use this as a signal of its comparatively superior financial soundness than a bank with less impressive architecture.

In either scenario, agents are signaling something to other agents that allows the latter to fill in the knowledge gaps left by the existence of asymmetrical information.

Origin of Virtue Signaling

British journalist James Bartholomew is often credited with originating the term "virtue signalling" in an article in The Spectator in 2015. The blog LessWrong used the phrase in 2013, but Bartholomew claimed credit for the creation of the phrase in later articles, mentioning that its popularity was likely due to a prior lack of terminology referring to the act. As he suggested, the concept of virtue signaling had been around for much longer than the term describing such acts. Indeed, in his 2019 book, Virtue Signaling: Essays on Darwinian Politics and Free Speech, evolutionary psychologist and free-speech advocate Geoffrey Miller echoes that he had witnessed the act of virtue signaling for years, but did not quite have the right phrase to describe it.

Lexicographer Orin Hargraves argues that the term stems from social media, which removes the barriers to broadcasting one's sentiments. Hargraves links the term to the "shaming" category of neologisms, such as "prayer-shaming" or "fat-shaming," which in themselves can be a form of virtue signaling; one's outward distaste for another's prayer, for example, signals the former's moral values regarding the act. Bartholomew also addressed the significance of social media in virtue signaling, pointing out that the short character limits on Twitter make it much easier to virtue signal than to formulate an argument.

Merriam-Webster editor Emily Brewster describes virtue signaling as an academic-sounding counterpart to the term "humblebrag," a term coined by Harris Wittels in 2010.

Usage

A person performing the amyotrophic lateral sclerosis Ice Bucket Challenge for charity. The activity has been criticised as virtue-signalling.

Virtue signaling rose in popularity as a pejorative term, denouncing empty acts of public commitment to unexceptional good causes. The term is characterized by the signaler's desire to show support for a cause without actually acting to support the cause in question. An important characteristic of virtue signaling is that there is little to no cost associated with the act; simple public vocalization in support of a cause has no cost to the signaler. In Bartholomew's original article, he describes virtue signaling as a public act with very little associated cost that is intended to inform others of one's socially acceptable alignment on an issue. Geoffrey Miller describes virtue signaling as an innate act, and something that all humans do and cannot avoid. Some examples of common virtue signaling include:

• Changing one's Facebook profile picture to support a cause
• Participating in the Ice Bucket Challenge for amyotrophic lateral sclerosis
• Offering thoughts and prayers after a tragedy
• Celebrity speeches during award shows or public gatherings, such as comedian Michelle Wolf's comment during her speech at the 2018 White House Correspondent's Dinner referring to the state of the non-potable water in Flint, Michigan at the time.
• Politicians pandering to constituents on ideological issues, such as promising a higher minimum wage to signal support for the lower classes
• Voicing hatred for large vehicles to show environmental consciousness
• Wishing someone a "great" day to indicate superior kindness compared to those who wish a "good" day
• Advocating for women's organizations to advertise a respect and love for women
• Denouncing upper-class consumer goods or news publications to show support for the less fortunate
• Publicly donating to charity to appear virtuous

Religious snake handling is seen by some to be a form of virtue signaling.

Some advocates of signaling theory use virtue signaling to describe the persistence or occurrence of various costly religious practices such as circumcision, fasting, snake handling, and trial by ordeal. This idea is that the participation in an act with a religious purpose serves as a way to signal one's dedication to the beliefs held by that religion, thereby signaling personal morality to onlookers.

Criticism

Since the conception of the phrase, virtue signaling has received mixed reviews regarding its validity. In an opinion piece in The New York Times, psychologists Jillian Jordan and David Rand argue that virtue signaling (i.e. feigned outrage) is separable from true outrage towards a particular belief, but that in most cases individuals who are virtue signaling are in fact simultaneously experiencing true outrage. In an article from The Guardian, David Shariatmadari argues that the typicality of virtue signaling to show-off one's own values makes it no different than the acts that it was supposed to abhor. That is, virtue signaling is designed to call out individuals on their lack of action, but the very act of doing so is an act of virtue signaling in itself. He addresses the recognition of one's virtue signaling as "smug" and points out that it comes from individuals with a false sense of power or superiority. In a similar vein, political theorist and economist Sam Bowman argued that the term is hypocritical in that calling out another individual's actions as virtue signaling is simply another form of virtue signaling, executed to heighten the perceived status of the accuser.

Adam Smith Institute Executive Director Sam Bowman opined that the meaning of the term popularised by James Bartholomew misuses the concept of signalling and encourages lazy thinking. In The Guardian, Zoe Williams suggested the phrase was the "sequel insult to champagne socialist" while fellow Guardian writer David Shariatmadari says that while the term serves a purpose, its overuse as an ad hominem attack during political debate has rendered it a meaningless political buzzword. Consequently, the antonym "vice signalling" has emerged to refer to blatant amorality.

See also

• Armchair revolutionary
• Armchair warrior
• Call-out culture
• Concern troll
• Dog-whistle politics
• Hypocrisy
• Moral superiority (disambiguation)
• Political correctness
• Race card
• Self-licensing
• Self-righteousness
• Shy Tory Factor
• Slacktivism
• Social desirability bias
• Social justice warrior
• Tribalism
• Watching-Eye Effect