Abstract
Consumers choose attractive products. Yet, luxury that is distinctively ugly (e.g., outrageous patterns, unflattering shapes, clashing color combinations) is selling well. Pavlov et al's research identifies distinctive ugliness as a signal of luxuriousness and fashion-forward nature that consumers recognize. Thus, they choose distinctively ugly products as often as their attractive counterparts. Drawing on costly signaling theory, they identify the value of distinctively ugly luxury. They propose that, because beauty is universally appreciated, ugliness can be perceived as costly. Thus, it can signal something of equal or greater value. However, for ugliness to signal, there must be an indication that it is a deliberate choice. Distinctiveness suggests intention; it is not a misjudgment or mistake. Thus, they predict that an aesthetic that is both highly unattractive and distinctive will suggest that the cost sustained was in order to gain something of equal or greater value, that is being from a luxury brand.