Least Signaling Activities?

I take it as ob­vi­ous that sig­nal­ing is an im­por­tant func­tion in many hu­man be­hav­iors. That is, the de­tails of many of our be­hav­iors make sense as a pack­age de­signed to per­suade oth­ers to think well of us. While we may not be con­scious of this de­sign, it seems im­por­tant nonethe­less. In fact, in many ar­eas we seem to be de­signed to not be con­scious of this in­fluence on our be­hav­ior.

But if sig­nal­ing is not equally im­por­tant to all be­hav­iors, we can sen­si­bly ask the ques­tion: for which be­hav­iors does sig­nal­ing least in­fluence our de­tailed be­hav­ior pat­terns? That is, for what be­hav­iors need we be the least con­cerned that our de­tailed be­hav­iors are de­signed to achieve sig­nal­ing func­tions? For what ac­tions can we most rea­son­ably be­lieve that we do them for the non-sig­nal­ing rea­sons we usu­ally give?

You might sug­gest sleep, but oth­ers are of­ten jeal­ous of how much sleep we get, or im­pressed by how lit­tle sleep we can get by on. You might sug­gest watch­ing TV, but peo­ple of­ten go out of their way to men­tion what TV shows they watch. The best can­di­date I can think of so far is mas­tur­ba­tion, though some folks seem to brag about it as a sign of their in­ex­haustible libido.

So I thought to ask the many thought­ful com­men­tors at Less Wrong: what are good can­di­dates for our least sig­nal­ing ac­tivi­ties?

Added: My in­ter­est in this ques­tion is to look for signs of when we can more trust our con­scious rea­son­ing about what to do when how. The more sig­nal­ing mat­ters, the less I can trust such rea­son­ing, as it usu­ally does not ac­knowl­edge the sig­nal­ing in­fluences. If there is a dis­tinc­tive men­tal mode we en­ter when rea­son­ing about how ex­actly to defe­cate, nose-pick, sleep, mas­tur­bate, and so on, this is plau­si­bly a more hon­est men­tal mode. It would be use­ful to know what our most hon­est men­tal modes look like.