I think the dressing well vs badly dichotomy may be misleading here, a better analogy might be with similarity to certain archetypes.
For example neither Barack Obama or Justin Timberlake dress ‘badly’ but he way they dress is radically different. So if you want to alter your social perceptions dress in a manner similar to the archetype most relevant to your goals.
Applying this, if you are in a university environment your goals might be wanting the professor to treat your work favourably, and possibly be lenient in cases. Hence you can choose similarity to the archetypes “Lazy student” (Stained t-shirt, baggy trousers) or “Academic” (Shirt, neat but non flashy clothes). This can be generalized to other environments and social signalling situations.
I think the dressing well vs badly dichotomy may be misleading here, a better analogy might be with similarity to certain archetypes.
For example neither Barack Obama or Justin Timberlake dress ‘badly’ but he way they dress is radically different. So if you want to alter your social perceptions dress in a manner similar to the archetype most relevant to your goals.
Applying this, if you are in a university environment your goals might be wanting the professor to treat your work favourably, and possibly be lenient in cases. Hence you can choose similarity to the archetypes “Lazy student” (Stained t-shirt, baggy trousers) or “Academic” (Shirt, neat but non flashy clothes). This can be generalized to other environments and social signalling situations.