[o09rdk]

The clothing itself isn't really what I necessarily expected, if you look at the pictures themselves (https://osf.io/v2j43/). The "rich" clothing is just more like "formal" or "conservative" clothing, and the "poor" is more "casual". They seem to have tried to control for the formality aspect but I'm not sure they did so completely (for example, there's still blazers in the set with "formal" attire removed). I also suspect there's an age dimension involved as well, in that some of the clothing is much more likely to be worn by younger individuals than older individuals, or vice versa.

Of course this will be correlated with wealth, because dressier clothes are more expensive, and older individuals probably will have more wealth than when they were younger. However, the clothing isn't the spectrum I was expecting necessarily, and I'm not sure "rich" versus "poor" are the right labels.

Also, I can understand how most of the clothing came to be categorized the way it was, some of it is confusing to me. There's definitely items that I think would be classified in the other category. It would be nice to tailor this more to specific individuals more.

To be honest I'm a bit surprised this is getting this much attention because the social psychology literature is full of findings like this already.

[Agenttin]

It does seem to boil down to the idea that people in ties appear more competent than people not in ties.