Signalling Theory of Hobbies

Dynomight recently posted about his obsession with the “tunnel man”, an unidentified 31 year old man who has grown obsessed with digging a tunnel, as described by his SO:

Most of the responses were reasonable, ranging from:

1. He should be careful, because the tunnel could collapse.

2. He should be careful, because he might run out of oxygen and die.

3. If tunneling makes him happy, then you should be supportive.

4. If tunneling is hurting your relationship, then you should talk to him.

After an update, the OP claimed that she was successful in getting her boyfriend to cut back on time spent digging the runnel, and convinced him to install ventilation.

Dynomight noted that there was little animosity towards the boyfriend in the thread, which I also find unusual. He theorized that this is because tunneling functions as a kind of anti-pornography, where it is not an activity that evolution has caused people to like and it is not an activity where humans have engineered it to be enjoyable. He listed some examples of activities to aid in conceptualization:

I have an alternative theory, originally promoted by Roko, which is that hobbies function as signalling mechanisms as well as wireheading mechanisms. That is, that people judge others based on which hobbies they had and what traits those hobbies correlate with. He originally promoted this theory to argue that people who like Warhammer 40000 are “losers” despite the fact that some high status men like Henry Cavill are avid fans of it. In the case of Henry Cavill, he is doing what sociologists call ‘countersignaling’, which is deliberately promoting signals of low class or status to inadvertently signal their high status.

As for the tunnel man, he is signalling high levels of industriousness and conscientiousness by digging a tunnel for a whole year.

There is some evidence that engaging in online gaming correlates with certain personality traits — low levels of conscientiousness and agreeableness in particular. Unfortunately, they use somewhat dubious measurements of time spent online gaming: the internet online gaming scale and the gaming addiction scale, which will disproportionately measure harmful uses of the activity.

That said, there are some activities which do reliably signal personality traits. Volunteering in particular is associated with high levels of extraversion, agreeableness, conscientiousness, openness, and emotional stability.

Popular hobbies are selected for the degree to which they provide a pleasure (e.g. doing heroin), productive effect (e.g. exercise) and signalling value (e.g. volunteering). Because of that, the social desirability value and hedonic value of popular hobbies should be anti-correlated. To test this hypothesis, I thought of several popular hobbies and sourced others from lists like this one. I then labelled which characteristics I thought each of them signalled and and how much I thought the average person would enjoy this hobby. I then constructed a social desirability index based on the personality traits each of the hobbies signalled: +3 for each point of intelligence, conscientiousness, and wealth, +2 for each point of extraversion and openness, +1 for each point of agreeableness, and -2 for each point of neuroticism.

I found that ‘subjective enjoyment’ and ‘social desirability’ were strongly anti-correlated (r = -.61, p < .001). That is, that hobbies which I judged to be the most ‘fun’ were also the ones that are the most socially undesirable.

The measurement of the social desirability of hobbies that I made is not that accurate — doing heroin is definitely less socially desirable than watching television and dancing is a socially desirable hobby. That said, the overall rank order seems to be accurate to me.

What counts as a hobby is also convoluted and not clear. In theory it is an activity that is done for the sake of pleasure, but in practice, many hobbies have productive consequences (e.g. improvements to physique, learning), and very few of them are overtly hedonistic; even some low status hobbies like watching television may be useful for learning about different archetypes, cultures, or social norms.

In terms of practical implications of this theory, I think hobbies should be ranked by their ability to provide hedonistic pleasure, productive ends, act as a socialization tool, and signal prosocial traits. From this perspective, I have the following to say about several popular hobbies:

• Reading: I don’t recommend reading fiction, unless the book in question is high quality. It’s not particularly pleasing, it doesn’t have a lot of practical use, and intelligence can be signalled in more useful ways.

• Writing: I also don’t recommend writing for similar reasons, unless you write for work, are extremely talented, and/or are a strange person.

• Gaming: pleasing, but not productive or socially desirable. Best done in small quantities.

• Watching television: watching television is underrated. It can be done in a social setting, it serves as a cultural transmission device, and high quality television is entertaining. That said, I do not recommend it as a main hobby - it’s socially undesirable and not very productive. I cannot speak for western media, but there are only so many good anime, and watching too many will cause you to run out of things to watch

• Pornography: I don’t think current evidence supports that it causes erectile dysfunction or depression (see NullSci article), but it probably causes people to adopt the paraphilias that are associated with the porn, including homosexuality and pedophilia. Would recommend limiting consumption to stay on the safe side, otherwise I don’t have strong feelings about it.

• Cooking: highly recommend. Good for impressing dates regardless of your sex, is productive, can be done in a social setting, and can be accompanied by a different activity (e.g. listening to a podcast).

• Traveling: I find traveling for reasons unrelated to work/high quality social interaction to be extremely unpleasant (in 2024, just mildly unpleasant). That said, it seems to be a very popular hobby, so this is probably not a universal experience.

• Exercise: not pleasant, but satisfying. Regardless, I recommend it, as it is productive, can be done in social settings, and is socially desirable.

• Astrology: it’s hard to talk about this one without mentioning the sex difference. Some women seem to be very into it, other females might be a little into it but as non-believers (think “cultural christian”); while almost all men think it is a joke or a red flag. Personally I think it’s probably best to steer clear from this one unless you are a man who really wants to get laid.

• Weed: gay. Anti-productive and socially undesirable.

• Heroin: not gay, but still not a good hobby. Expensive and potentially damaging.

• Dancing: underrated hobby — socially desirable, enjoyable, and promotes physical fitness.

• Collecting: do not recommend. Expensive, seems boring, and is not productive. Doesn’t seem to be socially desirable or undesirable — I think this is because it signals both resources and autism/immaturity at the same time.

• Card games: more boring than gaming, but less socially undesirable and easier to do in a social setting.

• Photography: do not recommend. Seems boring and sinks money.

• Alcohol: Personally, I am a committed teetotaler, but that’s probably not best for some of people. Inhibition and anxiety can lead to stiff or awkward social situations, and alcohol can reduce this.

• Wine tasting: gay.