iguess countercountersignaling would be signaling confidence in future info going so much one's way
anyway one interesting implication of model is countersignaling makes no sense unless one expects
-
-
to be able to send other/future information to back up the countersignal. insteadof losing audience
-
another confusing factor i think is whether one is trying to cause the most positive belief or the
-
most accurate belief or a mix. like the peanut allergy examplehttps://twitter.com/InstanceOfClass/status/421740892391612417 …
-
if you'reallergic to peanuts you want people to believe so, even if they will think a bit less of u
-
so this is a case where making people think less of you isn't out of countersignaling motives
-
not that a peanut allergy is a good reason to think less of people but you get the point probably
-
and i think there are other things like peanut case that are more confusable with countersignaling
-
i haven't looked at the linked math so maybe i'm saying wrong things though
-
if signal is result quality, adding separate signal of low effort also different than countersignal
-
in reality signals aren't sent once&then processed, they're stored/recalled/propagated at will
-
(not meaning to say that this is always important and/or that economists don't understand it)
End of conversation
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.