Limitations and future research suggestions

As in the case of every study, several limitations can be identified. At the same time, these offer fruitful opportunities for further research.

First, it has been suggested throughout the work that prosocial status signaling may occur largely non-consciously. Although the implicit effects of environmental cues on consumer behavior have been documented (Berger & Fitzsimons, 2008;

see also Wilson et al., 2016) and a number of methodological choices were deliberately made to favor the occurrence of nonconscious responding (e.g., subtle priming and cover stories), we cannot be sure of whether the “going green to be seen” effects emerged non-consciously, consciously, or in combination. This is especially true in the case of the second (A2) and the third (A3) articles (i.e., observing the consumption signal). In other words, more understanding is needed about the dynamics of the non-conscious and conscious processes of prosocial status signaling in the consumer’s mind. Shedding light on this necessitates the use of objective methods, such as the neuromarketing approach (see Plassmann, Ramsøy, & Milosavljevic, 2012). The findings of Lee et al. (2013) illustrate the potential of this method well. After their study participants were primed with two advertisement texts (one promoting a green options and the other promoting a non-green option), the EEG theta activity in the frontal brain was different between the green and non-green consumers.

Second, even though the thesis has produced intriguing sex-specific findings about the perceptions and behavioral implications created by organic food consumption (A2), in this regard, it operated solely in the intra-male realm. In other words, we do not know how a pro-organic female signaler would be perceived and treated by either a female or male signal receiver (this also holds for a male signaler and a female receiver). That is, before the final conclusions can be drawn regarding the sex-VSHFL¿FLWLHVRISURVRFLDOVWDWXVVLJQDOLQJWKHVHRWKHUVH[ combinations must be explored. The intra-female realm, in particular, is intriguing. In addition to increasing one’s own social standing (cf. Durante et al., 2014), what other fundamental motives might women possess to send a status signal through a prosocial choice to other women? Would this signaling female be a foe, rather than a friend, in the eyes of other females? These questions are left for future researchers to ponder.

Third, it must be acknowledged that only hypothetical scenarios were tested. This is the key limitation of the work. The treatment measured, for example, was not based on actual behavior but self-reported behavioral intentions. Thus, the behavioral implications created by prosocial status signaling must be investigated in a naturalistic context (i.e., observers’ real actions toward the signal sender), for instance, by collecting charity donations (e.g., while wearing a pro-organic or green cap) for local children’s foundations (cf. Nelissen & Meijers, 2011). Dictator and public goods games conducted in controlled laboratory settings provide another tool with which to validate the findings (cf. Milinski et al., 2006; Van Vugt &

Iredale, 2013). Similarly, although status motives caused consumers to favor organic food options over their conventionally produced counterparts (A1), actual purchases were not measured, but hypothetical product choices were. Regarding perceptual inferences, the case is the same. Actual organic food consumption was not investigated, but stated preferences were (A3). Consequently, the effects of eliciting status concerns on organic food choices must be studied in a real retail environment with methods involving actual purchases. The same principle should be followed (i.e., using a real shopping context) when further validating the usage impressions of organic vs. conventional foods. In fact, due to the point that in reality, consumers are rarely willing to pay the price premiums required for green options (see Groening et al., 2018), it appears to be imperative that the “going green to be seen” phenomenon is approached in an actual retail store context (cf.

McDonald et al., 2012).

Fourth, it is noteworthy that the studied organic food products did not confer prosociality or other socially valued traits to exactly the same extent, although the indications of the effects were always evident (A3). It is known that the market shares of organic food differ substantially between product categories (Juhl,

Fenger, & Thøgersen, 2017). Moreover, the typically positive organic label halo effect does not hold in all categories; organic vice foods, for example, are perceived as less tasty than their conventionally produced alternatives (Van Doorn &

Verhoef, 2011). For this reason, product categories with profoundly different symbolic connotations, such as the less socially approved of alcohol, emotionally charged chocolate (Thomson et al., 2010), or more up-scale product types (e.g., special cooking oils), should be explored. Peattie’s (1999) perception matrix may represent a potential conceptual tool with which to approach this issue because it allows researchers to classify various green products (Young et al., 2010). Are some organic product types perceived as clearly less prosocial or environmental friendly than others, and is the degree of compromise involved in purchasing them (vs.

non-green options) viewed differently in the case of certain categories (cf. Olsen, 2013)? To what extent are other prosocial consumption forms, such as fair trade (Coppola et al., 2017; Kimura et al., 2012) or local (Memery et al., 2015) or even vegan foods (see Lundahl, 2018), capable to conferring underlying qualities? How do various product types interact with perceptions? The inclusion of only one form of prosocial consumption – organically produced food – is a clear limitation of the current thesis.

Fifth, the work has identified several moderators of prosocial status signaling relating to both the sending and interpreting of the signal, such as social visibility (A1), sex dynamics (A2), socio-cultural context (A2), and observers’ value base (A3). As discussed above, some indications were also found that the product type of organic food can be influential in this regard (A3). Are there still other moderators? In addition to personal values, other psychological characteristics could qualify as moderators. Narcissists, for instance, are prone to favor expensive green goods due to the prestigious image they confer (Naderi & Strutton, 2015).

More specific environmental identities (see Brick et al., 2017) represent additional candidates for moderators. Furthermore, the informants in the thesis did not fully correspond with the Finnish census population: comparatively highly educated urban consumers, along with university students (cf. a convenience sample), were over-represented. Although this is a common problem in the domain of consumer research (see Peterson & Merunka, 2014), it is highly encouraged that all conducted experiments be replicated among consumers with clearly different socio-economic backgrounds, such as blue-collar workers or distinct lifestyle groups, and outside the Nordic consumption context.

Finally, it has been suggested throughout the work that the prosocial costly signal of favoring organic food is associated with certain underlying qualities of an individual, such as altruism-driven status and wealth. Is this really the whole story? Namely, it is well-documented that healthiness is one of the key motives

self-reported by consumers who opt for organic foods (e.g., Apaolaza et al., 2018), even though it KDVQRWEHHQXQDPELJXRXVO\LHVFLHQWL¿FDOO\SURYHn that these foods are healthier than conventionally produced foods (see Olson, 2017). Hence, a provocative research question arises: are pro-organic consumers also perceived as being healthier than other consumers? In any case, future research should more clearly identify the exact qualities being signaled through organic and green choices. It is possible that altruistic tendencies and the possession of greater resources are not the key elements of the message that has been transmitted through prosocial status signaling. To illustrate, several stable personality traits (e.g., the Big Five and their sub-traits) are closely related to altruism and the capability to generate wealth – agreeableness and conscientiousness in particular (cf. Miller, 2009). Whether these traits (or some of their sub-items) are indicated by one’s prosocial choices is a question for scholars beyond the consumer research domain to explore.