This could then be contrasted with results of anonymous surveys asking consumers to analyze their own motivations in virtuous consumption. By the discrepancy between the results of the two methods we could get some idea of the amount of consumers’ self-deception. (Maybe the ‘unmasking’ research you describe has this flavor, but I’m not versed in it and haven’t read the gated article.)

Ulltimately, though, I would want to introduce more complex hypotheses. For instance, introspecting my own experiences in facing virtue-laden choices, I believe signaling plays a role, BUT:

part of the motivation lies in taking a visible stand that will constrain my future decisions by the expectations formed in others and force these decisions more virtuous;

part lies in setting an example to others;

part lies in signaling *to myself* that virtue matters and can shape my own behavior. That is, the virtuous action is not necessarily decomposable into sincere and egoistic components, but has an aspect of self-training for further, larger and more sincere, virtuous actions.

How to bring these motivational factors out experimentally (or, perhaps, deflate them as lies or self-deception) seems like an interesting question.

Conspicuous virtue works both ways. Folks love bragging on the savings found at Walmart and Big Lots. One man’s virtue is another’s folly.

You’d be surprised, Julian. It maybe hasn’t hit the east coast yet, but here in Colorado and on the west coast, this is a pretty common topic of mealtime conversation. And not just amongst the hippies anymore, but in regular offices, restaurants, etc. However, I think ‘conspicuous virtue’ only accounts for part of this; I think it’s also about an emerging eco-snobbery, where purchasers of organic/hormone-free/cage-free/etc. foods assert that these foods taste better, and look disdainfully on those who can’t tell the difference. Along these lines, here’s a disturbing thought: biodynamically-grown wine, which is a hot topic in Europe, California and recently in Colorado. This has the potential to bring the eco-snobs together with the wine snobs, already the most pretentious in the world. No good can come of this.

Anyway you might be wrong on the status symbol of food. Here’s my thoughts…

I once had this friend that upon discussing the merits of one thing or another, say a restaurant, would always agree or inject his opinion as a regular consumer of said thing. However, upon further discussion would later reveal himself to be lying, usually by getting one fact or another obviously wrong to those of us who knew better. We figured he did this to feel like he fit in, or something. Kind of like someone who claims to really like a band that they really know nothing about because that band is a corner stone of some genres identity, and they really wanted to be “punk”, or whatever.

Anyway, what’s my point? Well I guess its that even when it comes to the consumption of certain things that seem completely private or opaque to others, they wind up being revealed in other ways. Food for instance is (might be?) one of those things. I don’t know how much you cook, but for those of us who do, and really enjoy it, can tell you that we often find great companionship in discussing it with fellow cooks. This includes everything from recipes to certain products, prices, and stores. If you really love cooking vegetarian, then you will go to great lengths to discuss your experiences of vegetarian cooking and son on. The same would go for grilling, or cocktail making, or whatever. Anyway my point is if you want to claim certain knowledge of such a thing it is often helpful to actually have the experience – (and of course it is the “claim” that is conspicuous right?). I would assume this would apply to the “morally conscious” grocery shopper as well. They may not talk about it at the dinner party with everyone there, most of who might not care anyway. But they certainly will reveal their consumption patterns to those of like mind that are also “in the club”.