Study Limitations and Future Research

The final sample collected for this study was relatively small. This means

that the results are not overly generalizable to the broader public and it is difficult

to get significant results. Only 90 individuals completed the survey in full, thus

many of my results were only marginally significant with some approaching

significance. It is possible that the low response rate was due to the online nature

of the study as online surveys require motivation from participants, thus it is

difficult to receive large numbers (Bryman and Bell, 2007). With a larger sample,

it is possible that the evidence in support of the hypotheses can be strengthened,

thus future research should aim to increase the current sample size to ensure the

results from this study are applicable.

Ethnicity was one demographic not examined in this study, despite results

suggesting that cultural factors such as New Zealand’s “Tall Poppy Syndrome” and East Asia’s face-saving orientation may influence possible income stereotype lift. Prior research has also shown that ethnicity can influence stereotype threat, as

certain groups are targeted by the poor stereotype more than others (see Spencer et

al., 1999; O’Brien and Hummert, 2006; Steele, 2010). Future research should examine any effects cultural variables have on income stereotype threat and

109

differences. It is possible that New Zealanders aim to reject income stereotype lift

in order to blend in, thus research should aim to compare a New Zealand sample

to an East Asian example to examine the effects of “Tall Poppy Syndrome” and face-saving orientation more closely.

Future research should also examine a wider range of participants in terms

of age groups and occupation. The present sample consisted of two very distinct

groups, these being students and full-time workers. By only having seven

respondents indicate they were completely unemployed, this may restrict

responses in the poor condition. Sampling people who society actually considers

to be poor i.e. unemployed with low to no income, would be greatly beneficial in

studying the effects of stereotype threat in future research. It is these individuals

who are likely to have experienced it on a daily basis in a real market

environment, thus future samples should aim to group participants based on their

actual incomes.

The respondents that did participate are limited due to the survey being

only accessible online. Making the survey available only online limits the kind of

respondents to those with easy computer access (Bryman and Bell, 2007). Future

research should examine ways to record responses of those who may not have

ready access to the internet. This is important as those without a steady income

may find it difficult to find and access a computer with an internet connection,

therefore this important social group is excluded from the study. Future research

should also examine family size. Previous studies have examined the ways in

which family size i.e. how many children are being taken care of, can affect retail

spending and the types of brands chosen for purchase (Wiepking et al., 2012;

110

of family size on shopping behaviours while under negative income stereotype

threat as it is possible that family size may directly influence one’s susceptibility to the threat and thus have a negative impact on their retail spending.

Unlike previous studies, the present research did not measure pre-existing

attitudes towards the rich and poor (See Alston and Dean, 1972; Chafel, 1997;

Bullock, 1999). Future research could require participants to indicate their beliefs

regarding poverty and wealth stereotypes and examine whether these beliefs have

any effect on how they perceive the other shopper. It is possible that there would

be a difference in income stereotype threat/lift activation depending if the

participant actually believes in the stereotype.

Despite offering only one small incentive, there is the risk that the study

attracted a certain kind of participant. According to Bryman and Bell (2007), not

everybody is equally responsive to the prospect of a small reward, thus the

participants who did complete the survey are likely to be individuals who are

easily targeted by the promise of a prize. This limits the sample as those who are

not swayed by an incentive are likely to have ignored participation invitations. It

is also important to consider the ethical nature of pairing incentives with people

who are not currently in a stable financial position. If future research is to focus

on a larger sample of low-income earners, incentives should be either eliminated

or be non-monetary in nature in order to eliminate any risk of participants relying

on these incentives.

Most of the mediators in this study focussed on situational feelings such as

self-esteem, embarrassment and self-worth. None of these mediators proved to be

overly significant in facilitating the effects of stereotype threat. Testing these

111

these feelings accurately due to their self-report nature. Steele (2010) suggests it is

difficult to gauge internal states as people are limited in reporting on them.

Requiring individuals to self-report is difficult as people often cannot fully

comprehend how they are feeling, nor separate one feeling from another (Aronson

et al., 1999). It is also likely that some participants did not wish to answer how

they were feeling as some internal states are not considered socially acceptable or

desired. From previous research, it is possible to accurately measure an increase in

anxiety levels through the monitoring of an individual’s heartbeat and blood pressure (Steele, 2010). Future research may expand on the current laboratory

experiment to include these scientific tests and gauge a more accurate

understanding of the changes in a participant’s internal state.

While lab experiments were the most appropriate choice for this particular

study, it is possible that future research may examine individuals in a more natural

environment through field experiments. Field experiments are higher in external

validity, thus their results can be considered more generalizable (Bryman and

Bell. 2007). Future research should examine participants in existing, well-known

retail environments that are known for their differences in affordability and target

markets. This can ensure that those experiencing negative income stereotype

threat do so in an environment where they normally would and their behaviour

can be examined without any sensitisation to the real nature of the study. While

field experiments are more difficult for the researcher to control, it is likely that

the situation will feel more ‘real’ to the participants and thus feelings and

behaviours that are displayed during their shop can be considered more accurate.

112

environment, unlike a lab experiment and thus the data collected can provide a

deeper insight into the phenomenon.

Finally, a change in the way participants are presented with the

experimental manipulations could bring a change in results. In the present study,

participants were presented with implicit manipulations. They were not explicitly

told they were rich or poor in comparison to the other shopper or that the

behaviour of the shop assistant was in any way related to their financial situation.

It has been shown that implicit and explicit manipulations of similar conditions

can yield vastly different results (Ivanic et al., 2011), thus future research should

examine the impact of explicit manipulations on participant responses.