Right, that would be a good argument IF we were talking about a bunch of random people whose rank is completely unknown, and in fact this sort of heuristic is the usual, common sense one that leads to the situation we're describing (and that can be exploited).

The KEY information here is that they're at the same rank. That means the slob has had to overcome people using the heuristic you've just described in order to reach the same rank, probably through being an objectively better surgeon.

> I would venture to say there's no correlation between how someone looks and how someone performs.

I would argue that if someone looks the part, then they can be successful with a lower level of skill, and so they have less incentive to really be as good. My impression is that people generally, and doctors in particular, are quite lazy and generally aim to only be as good at a thing as they need to to get what they want, so the guy who looks the part is likely to be less competent.

There will be exceptions obviously, but I know that if I meet someone who puts a lot of effort into appearances, my presumption is not that he does this because he is incredibly hard working and just puts more energy into everything. In my experience that's not usually the explanation.

Another explanation is that people who "look the part" do so as a way to signal that they take good care of themselves, and by extension anyone that they might be entangled with.

Absolutely.

I would guess that's the most common reason for people to look the part. I can't really tell if you're agreeing or disagreeing with what I said!

It takes creativity and effort to look the part. It takes creativity and effort to be normal. Which means less creativity has been applied elsewhere like to something important.

Yeah but on a scale of "1 to Surgeon" how much creativity is really traded off in how someone dresses?

14 years of schooling vs 30 min on the internet?

I'd say the effort trade off is statistically insignificant.

Good point. However cargo-culting other surgeons subtly and fashionably and well enough to fool promotion committees into overlooking mediocre performance might take more creativity than you think. For one thing surgeons are intelligent, status-oriented, complicated creatures. It's not just about picking the right clothing. Not giving the game away by your demeanour may require that you fool yourself too. Such narcissism might take a herculean effort to maintain because your ideas about yourself are connected to other, more objective, ideas. You might have to organise professional conferences and get involved in politics, which always take a psychological toll. If your attention is on the wrong things this could indicate that privately you don't believe your surgical performance is up to much or that it can be improved. Which may turn out to be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

Looking the part takes less effort than you might think. One study showed that men who shave spend the same amount of time in the bathroom as men who don't on average despite the fact shaving takes time.

The key would be asking if their resultant hygiene or other important metrics are equivalent

I could save time in the bathroom by not washing my hands, but I'd rather not.

Creative people apply creativity to all aspects of their life. I don't see it as a resource which must be rationed

And a surgeon needs to inspire confidence on both his patients and team