investigating womens plus-size body measurements and hip shape variation based on sizeusa data, 2011

This article was downloaded by: [95.77.109.186]On: 29 January 2015, At: 05:46Publisher: Taylor & FrancisInforma Ltd Registered in England and Wales Registered Number: 1072954 Registered office: Mortimer House,37-41 Mortimer Street, London W1T 3JH, UK

International Journal of Fashion Design, Technologyand EducationPublication details, including instructions for authors and subscription information:http://www.tandfonline.com/loi/tfdt20

Investigating women's plus-size body measurementsand hip shape variation based on SizeUSA dataMarina Alexander a , Gina R. Pisut b & Andrada Ivanescu ca East Carolina University, Interior Design and Merchandising , Rivers Building, College ofHuman Ecology, Greenville , 27858 , USAb Department of Human Sciences , Middle Tennessee State University , MTSU P.O. Box 86,Textile Merchandising and Design, Murfreesboro , 37132 , USAc Department of Biostatistics , East Carolina University , College of Allied Health Sciences,Greenville , 27834 , USAPublished online: 04 Jul 2011.

To cite this article: Marina Alexander , Gina R. Pisut & Andrada Ivanescu (2012) Investigating women's plus-size bodymeasurements and hip shape variation based on SizeUSA data, International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology andEducation, 5:1, 3-12, DOI: 10.1080/17543266.2011.589083

To link to this article: http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17543266.2011.589083

PLEASE SCROLL DOWN FOR ARTICLE

Taylor & Francis makes every effort to ensure the accuracy of all the information (the Content) containedin the publications on our platform. However, Taylor & Francis, our agents, and our licensors make norepresentations or warranties whatsoever as to the accuracy, completeness, or suitability for any purpose of theContent. Any opinions and views expressed in this publication are the opinions and views of the authors, andare not the views of or endorsed by Taylor & Francis. The accuracy of the Content should not be relied upon andshould be independently verified with primary sources of information. Taylor and Francis shall not be liable forany losses, actions, claims, proceedings, demands, costs, expenses, damages, and other liabilities whatsoeveror howsoever caused arising directly or indirectly in connection with, in relation to or arising out of the use ofthe Content.

This article may be used for research, teaching, and private study purposes. Any substantial or systematicreproduction, redistribution, reselling, loan, sub-licensing, systematic supply, or distribution in anyform to anyone is expressly forbidden. Terms & Conditions of access and use can be found at http://www.tandfonline.com/page/terms-and-conditions

Investigating womens plus-size body measurements and hip shape variation basedon SizeUSA data

Marina Alexandera*, Gina R. Pisutb and Andrada Ivanescuc

aEast Carolina University, Interior Design and Merchandising, Rivers Building, College of Human Ecology, Greenville 27858, USA;bMiddle Tennessee State University, Department of Human Sciences, MTSU P.O. Box 86, Textile Merchandising and Design,

Murfreesboro 37132, USA; cEast Carolina University, Department of Biostatistics, College of Allied Health Sciences,Greenville 27834, USA

(Received 28 February 2011; nal version received 12 May 2011)

The womens plus-size apparel category is a growing market segment in the USA as more than two-thirds (64%) ofAmerican women are considered either overweight or obese (Flegal et al., 2010. Prevalence and trends in obesityamong US adults, 19992008. Journal of the American Medical Association, 303 (3), 235241. Available from: http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/303/3/235 [Accessed 6 July 2010]). Pisut and Connell (2007. Fit preferences offemale consumers in the USA. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 11 (3), 366379) and Simmons et al.(2004. Female gure identication technique (FFIT) for apparel, part II: development of shape sorting software.Journal of Textile and Apparel Technology and Management, 4 (1)) reported that women today reect a more pear-shaped silhouette than in previous decades. Kurt Salmon Associates (2000. Annual consumer outlook survey. Paperpresented at the American Apparel and Footwear Association apparel research committee, Orlando, FL) reportedthat more than half the women have trouble nding well-tting clothes. Consumers gure types play a signicantrole in aecting sizing measurements of apparel (Njagi, R.K. and Zwane, P.E., 2011. Variation in measurementsacross dierent brands of same style ladies pants in Swaziland. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology,and Education, 4 (1), 5157). Apparel patterns are made for hourglass-shaped women and are graded from anaverage size, assuming that womens measurements increase proportionally as size increases. Based on SizeUSA, anational dataset, women were classied into each size category based on their bust, waist and hip measurements, andtheir measurements were compared to American Society of Testing and Materials (ASTM) standards. Resultsshowed a signicant dierence for most size categories. Within each size category, fewer participants satised allthree measurements of bust, waist and hips. From these measurements, womens hip shape was determined andevaluated for sizes 14W32W. Analysis of hip shape revealed that dierent hip shapes exists within a given apparelsize. Research methods and implications are discussed.

Keywords: women; plus-size clothing; USA; apparel sizing; hip shape

1. Introduction

Currently, womens apparel is sold in the USA basedon apparel size codes that have no direct relationshipto the wearers actual body measurements. Themeasurements that correspond to each apparel sizevary widely among designers, manufacturers andretailers. This inconsistency in apparel sizing hascaused much confusion for todays female consumers(Brown and Rice 2001, Alexander et al. 2005, Apeagyei2008). The reason for this confusion can be attributedto many causes: the apparel industry relies on anoutdated system to clothe todays women and there isno standardisation of apparel sizes in the industry, thechanging shape and size of the American consumers,and the practice of vanity sizing, and the downsizing ofgarment sizes to t larger measurements. Due to thesefactors, womens apparel today is tting fewer people

than ever before. Kurt Salmon Associates (2000) andAlexander (2005) reported that more than half ofwomen have trouble nding well-tting clothes. Con-sumer t problems result in sizing confusion, dissa-tisfaction with clothing, time hassles, and also highproduct returns and exchanges (Faust and Carrier2010). Thus, t problems cost not only consumers, butalso retailers and manufacturers valuable time andmoney.

In recent years, most womens clothing stores inthe USA have focused on standard size apparel from212. Instead of tting into standard sizing, todayswomen are becoming larger and tting into morespecialty sizing categories. In fact, over two-thirds ofwomen today are considered overweight, and ofthose women over one-third is considered obese(Flegal et al. 2010, Kurt Salmon Associates 2010).

*Corresponding author. Email: [email protected]

International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education

Vol. 5, No. 1, March 2012, 312

ISSN 1754-3266 print/ISSN 1754-3274 online

2012 Taylor & Francishttp://dx.doi.org/10.1080/17543266.2011.589083

http://www.tandfonline.com

Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

These consumers are increasing the needs in the plus-size womens category. For years, the plus-sizemarket has been underserved, giving rise to increaseddissatisfaction with garment t and lack of selectionof contemporary garment styles. Even with the largenumber of consumers who fall into plus sizes,designers and manufacturers still fail to oerappropriate styling and sizing options for womenssizes 14W32W. Marketing of plus-size garments areoften not visually apparent in the store and sales areoften delegated to online shopping only. Even intough economic times, there is high demand forapparel in this market that should be pursued.Specialty retailer Talbots asserted that the plus-sizecustomer is worth pursuing because she focuses moreon full-price shopping, she spends more than averagewhen in store shopping, and she buys more itemsand more expensive items overall (Kurt SalmonAssociates 2010). In fact, women in this apparelcategory spent $18.6 billion on apparel in 2008 (KurtSalmon Associates 2010). As the plus-size marketgrows due to the increased size of American womenand increased aging population, the increased spend-ing power of this market provides great opportu-nities for companies willing to invest in satisfying theneeds of this market.

1.1. Purpose and objectives of the study

The purpose of this study was to analyse bodymeasurements and hip shape of plus-size women andoer new sizing information that can be used to improvegarment t for the plus-size womens apparel market.The following research questions guided the study.

(1) How many women satisfy American Society ofTesting and Materials (ASTM) standard bodymeasurements (bust, waist and hips) for wo-mens size category 14W32W?

(2) For each bust measurement listed for womensplus-sizes 14W32W, what is the mean of thecorresponding waist and hip measurements ofSizeUSA subjects in the range of +100 of thecorresponding ASTM standard? With the goalof testing if ASTM standard is met in each sizecategory.

(3) For each hip measurement listed for womensplus-sizes 14W32W, what is the mean of thecorresponding bust and waist measurements ofSizeUSA subjects in the range of +100 of thecorresponding ASTM standard? With the goalof testing if ASTM standard is met in each sizecategory.

(4) Does the hip shape change as the size increasesfrom 14W to 32W?

2. Literature review

2.1. Womens sizing and classications

In the USA, in an eort to best satisfy the consumersclothing needs, apparel for women is divided intovarious sizing categories including misses, womens,plus-size, petite and tall. Misses, womens, and plus-size categories serve women from 50500 to 50900 in height,while petite serves women 50 to 50400 and tall serveswomen over 50900 (Ashdown 1998). Within each sizecategory, there are gure distinctions that change theproportions for each size. For womens apparel, sizes1424 usually refer to a fuller gure with larger torsoproportions than misses sizes of 212, and plus-sizerefers to a larger gure correlating most commonlywith misses sizes 1432 (Ashdown 1998, ASTM 2004).The misses, womens and plus-sizes category divisionshave remained consistent over the years while stan-dards were developed to help give measurementguidelines for each size code. However, the applicationof these standards has been only voluntary since therst standard was published in 1958.

Currently, ASTM International is responsible forupdating and monitoring the voluntary standards forthe apparel industry in the USA. The body measure-ment information given in the ASTM standardsenables manufacturers to develop more accuratepatterns based on current anthropometric data of aspecic population (ASTM 2004). The most recentstandard for plus-size gures is ASTM InternationalStandard D6960-04. Updated in 2004, ASTM Stan-dard D6960-04 claried the body measurements forplus-size women sizes 14W32W in an eort to helpreduce consumer confusion and dissatisfaction inregard to apparel sizing (ASTM 2004). Rather thanplus-size measurements being associated with a tallergure, the revised standard D6960-04 reected plus-size measurements for the average height and morerounded body gures (Keiser and Garner 2008).

Today, womens ready-to-wear sizing is stilllabelled by manufacturers using the same numericalsize codes, but each manufacturer develops its ownsizing table with the size codes given based on the bust,waist, hip circumference that t the gure types of itsspecic market (Faust and Carrier 2010). Still, bodymeasurements associated with a particular size maychange over time due to the changing customer and/orher measurements. Workman (1991) reported that asize 8 in todays misses category has approximately thesame measurements that a size 16 had in the 1902 SearsRoebuck catalogue. Furthermore, what was a size 8(34 6 24 6 34) in the 1950s had become a 4 by the1970s and 0 today (Jackson 2006). Therefore over time,numerical size codes may not represent consistentbody measurements across manufacturers or within

4 M. Alexander et al.

Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

the same manufacturer. This inconsistency of sizingfollowed in the womens wear industry creates a lot ofconfusion among consumers (Brown and Rice 2001,Apeagyei 2008). If consumers are not familiar withthe sizing of each manufacturer, then they have tospend a lot of time trying to nd clothes that t themcorrectly.

Even though the additional size categories ofwomens plus-size, petite and tall have been added tohelp alleviate t issues and size variations amongwomen in the USA, t dissatisfaction is prevalent dueto the vast dierences in manufacturers measurementsused for each sizing designation. Therefore, informa-tion other than just body measurements that helpaddress the various sizes and shapes within eachcategory would be useful to clarify sizing dierencesfor the consumer (Jones and Giddings 2010). Usingtheir target markets measurements, proportions andgure types, manufacturers have the opportunity touse individualised size charts to better t the wants andneeds that correspond to their particular market niche(Faust and Carrier 2010).

To address the gure shape of todays femaleconsumer, researchers at Auburn University developeda body shape assessment tool that classied womenswhole and component body shape. Connell et al.

(2006) developed the Body Shape Assessment Scale(BSAS1) using 3D scans to help further understandthe body shape of todays consumers, to enable moreaccurate patterns to be developed and better t to beachieved in womens ready-to-wear. The hip shapescale in BSAS distinguished where the greatest curveoccurred between the waist and the crotch line.Categories distinguished areas with the greatest full-ness being just below the waist (High Hip), about halfway between the waist and crotch line (Mid Hip), at ornear the crotch line (Low Hip), and if the gure wasalmost straight from the waist to the crotch line the hipshape was classied as Straight Hip (Connell et al.2006). Hip shape information could help develop moreaccurate patterns for the lower body by either alteringthe shape of the pattern and/or by oering dierenttypes of garments to best t the dierent hip shapes(Figure 1). Faust and Carrier (2010) assert that apparelcompanies need to be familiar with and understandtheir target markets size as well as silhouette beforedesigning apparel. Some companies have alreadyintegrated a dierent hip shape option into their sizingstructure. Levis is just one company who will start tooer Slight Curve, Demi Curve and Bold Curve to twomen with dierent hip shapes (Levi Strauss & Co.2010). Manufacturers for womens plus-size apparel

Figure 1. Body shape assessment scale Hip shape categories.

International Journal of Fashion Design, Technology and Education 5

Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

need to know and understand the true body shapes andsizes of todays female consumers to achieve better tand satisfaction for their target markets. Alexanderet al. (2005) asserted that it is imperative to accuratelycompile body form and size distributions for a targetpopulation in order to eciently produce well-ttedclothing.

2.2. Obesity and the changing body shapeof women in the USA

For more than 10 years, the body shape of women haschanged and continues to change due to a combinationof obesity and aging of the population in the USA(Bond 2004). On average in the USA, between early1960s and 2002, adult women gained more than 24pounds and their height increased approximately oneinch (Ogden et al. 2004). Especially in the 1980s and1990s, obesity in women increased signicantly. By19992002, these changes in weight and height forwomen resulted in an overall mean weight of approxi-mately 163 pounds and mean height of 64 inches(Ogden et al. 2004). Since 1999, obesity has continuedto increase, but at a slower rate (Flegal et al. 2010).Todays woman is considerably taller and heavier thanin the past, but she is growing heavier more quicklythan she is getting taller. She is carrying more weight inthe lower body dimensions, giving her a more pearshaped body (Bond 2004). The increased height andlarger body dimensions often place women into the tall(over 50900) and plus-size (size 14 and larger) specialtycategories. Part of this increase in overweight or obesecategories is due to the large aging Baby Boomerpopulation in the USA. Trust for Americas Healths(TFAH) most recent analysis found that the BabyBoomer generation has a higher rate of obesitycompared with previous generations (Trust for Amer-icas Health & the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation2009, 2010). In fact for all women, The Center forDisease Control reported that 64% are overweight(BMI 25) or obese (BMI 30); of those, 35.5% ofwomen are obese (Flegal et al. 2010).

As people age and often gain weight, body shapechanges. For woman, the abdomen and hip areas havea tendency to enlarge, changing the overall size shewears. However, with this change in size comes aproportionally dierent change in the shape of herbody, making it hard to nd garments that tappropriately (Bond 2004). Womens sizing standardstoday are still characterised by proportionally equalsize increases for the bust, waist and hips. As one getsolder and/or gains weight, these proportional changesare less accurate to the body shapes they are trying tot (Bond 2004). As a result, clothing covering the lowerbody frequently has t issues.

In addition to the number of older females, theUSA also has an ever-increasing mixture of ethnicgroups, each with a dierent physical make-up. Thus,an endless amount of consumer variation exists inbody proportion as well as weight distribution. Thisdiversity in ethnic population and diering body sizesand shapes may also contribute to the prevalence of tproblems because of the increased variance from theindustry standard (Pisut and Connell 2007). Thoughthere have been studies of the eect of weight gain onwomen, little of that information has been applied todeveloping sizing that ts current womens measure-ments in the USA (Pisut and Connell 2007). With thediverse US population, it is important to investigatebody shape dierences by size, age and ethnicity inorder to better serve our current population and tohelp business cater to their target market.

2.3. Womens plus-size market

Today, the average American womans size is a 14(Silverman 2009). Not only is the average Americanwoman a larger size, but also the body of the Americanwoman has changed to reect fuller or wider lowerbody measurements (Bond 2004). Simmons et al.(2004), Connell et al. (2006), Pisut and Connell(2007) and Manuel et al. (2010) reported that womentoday reect a more pear-shaped silhouette than inprevious decades. Within those wider measurements,an even greater variety exists in where weight iscarried. Fit problems have been occurring throughoutthe womens apparel market for some time. Now, withthe changing lower body of the consumer, t inwomens apparel, including the plus-size market hasbeen especially troublesome. Current sizing and grad-ing systems in womens apparel begin with measure-ments based on one size and body shape (Pisut andConnell 2007). As measurements increase or decrease,garments are graded up or down proportionally in allbody dimensions based in increments that maintain theshape of the garment. Unfortunately, grade rules usedto make womens patterns have yet to reect theincrease in size of womens lower body dimensions(Ross 2003).

Even with the large percentage of overweightfemales in the American population, they only reect17% of the womens apparel market (Cliord 2010).This is due, in part, to the limited availability ofplus-size clothing in stores. Some retailers have left theplus-size market, citing increased costs and diculty inmaking the garments, stocking multiple sizes, morefabric and/or using special machinery (Cliord 2010,UPI NewsTrack 2010). Other retailers have shiftedtheir plus-size oerings online. Today, companies arenot only missing out on sales due to markdowns and


Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

returns for incompatible sizing, they are even missingthe initial sales because they are not oering theplus-size customer what she wants and needs in herapparel choices. The womens plus-size market showsthe greatest growth potential due to the number ofpeople categorised as overweight or obese, and the lackof choices currently in the market (Just-style.com2007). In fact, plus-size sales were up 1.4% for theyear ending as of April 2010, while sales for womensapparel overall dropped 0.8% (Cliord 2010). There isan increased demand for plus-size clothing, whichprovides incentives for companies who are willingto commit to this important customer (Silverman2009).

3. Methodology

3.1. SizeUSA database

In 20022003, the SizeUSA national survey gathereddemographic information including age, gender, ethnicgroup, annual household income, marital status, zipcode, lifestyle, education, employment status andapparel shopping preferences, as well as sizing dataof men and women through body scanning technologyusing the Body Measurement System (Ross 2003, [TC]2

2004). Combining the use of both anthropometric datawith body scans provides a more accurate representa-tion of how clothing will t on the body because itshows body proportions as well as weight distribution.Proportions need to be seen and understood becausethe general shape of ones body greatly aects how thecut of a garment will hang and wear for a particularconsumer. Data from the SizeUSA study can be usednot only to understand the changing size and shape oftodays consumer, but also to improve t, availabilityof sizes, and overall customer satisfaction and loyalty(Ross 2003).

For the purpose of this study, only womens datawere analysed from the SizeUSA dataset which waspurchased from the Textile/Clothing TechnologyCorporation [TC]2. The SizeUSA study consisted of6814 female participants who were 18 years of age orolder. The body scanning technology collected 200accurate body measurements of each participant (Ross2003). There was no missing or unusable measurementdata. Since the SizeUSA study required body scanning

of each participant, body measurements were auto-matically congured during the scanning process. Anypreviously problematic data from the body scans wereomitted before the SizeUSA study was available forpurchase and use.

This research focused on the bust, waist and hipmeasurements of the women who participated in theSizeUSA study. Bust and waist measurements wereused because they are important key measurementsused to t upper body garments such as shirts andjackets. Waist and hip measurements were used as wellbecause of their importance for good t in lower bodygarments such as pants and skirts. All three measure-ments (bust, waist and hips) are likewise important fora garment that ts the whole body such as a dress.Therefore, these three key body measurements wereextracted using the Body Measurement Softwaredeveloped by [TC]2 and compared to ASTM standardsfor plus size women.

3.2. Data analysis

To determine the accuracy of todays female bodymeasurements, as referenced in current sizing cate-gories, the sizing recommendations provided byASTM for womens plus-sizes 14W32W (ASTM D-6960-04) were used. ASTM standards were used sincethey are still the only sizing guideline available for USapparel companies today (Table 1). This study focusedonly on women who participated in the SizeUSA studywho could be categorised as plus-size according totheir bust, waist, or hip measurements based on ASTMD-6960-04 standards. Simple frequencies were rstperformed to determine the number of SizeUSAsubjects who satised ASTM bust, waist and hipmeasurements (ASTM measurement 71.0 inches toASTM measurement 0.9999 inches) for each sizecategory for 14W32W. For example, bust measure-ments for size 14W included those subjects with a bustmeasurement of 38.5 inches to 41.4999 inches, waistmeasurements from 30.5 inches to 33.4999 inches andhip measurements from 40.5 inches to 43.4999 inches.The body scanner is able to extract up to six decimalplaces for each extracted measurement. However, forthe purpose of this study decimals were rounded tofour places. Women who had a bust measurement of

Table 1. Bust, waist and hip measurements for womens plus-sizes 14W32W (ASTM D-6960-04).

14W 16W 18W 20W 22W 24W 26W 28W 30W 32W

Bust girth 39.5 41.5 43.5 45.5 47.5 49.5 51.5 53.5 55.5 57.5Waist girth 31.5 33.5 35.5 37.5 39.5 41.5 43.5 45.5 47.5 49.5Hip girth 41.5 43.5 45.5 47.5 49.5 51.5 53.5 55.5 57.5 59.5


Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

38.5, waist measurement of 30.5 and hip measurementof 40.5 and over were included in this study. Therefore,this study included 4105 women who satised the bustmeasurement for apparel size 14W and above, 4855women who satised the waist measurement for 14Wand above, and 3968 women who satised the hipmeasurement for size 14W and above. T-tests wereperformed to compare the ASTM standards againstthe SizeUSA data used for our sample to determinewhether there were signicant dierences in the bodymeasurement of todays plus-sized female consumerand the body measurements used to dene each sizecategory for 14W32W.

To determine womens hip shape in each of the sizecategories from 14W to 32W, measurements and bodyscans were analysed using the BSAS. BSAS classiedfour dierent hip shapes: Straight Hip, High Hip, MidHip and Low Hip (Figure 1). To determine the hipshape category, hip shape was viewed from the frontusing the level of greatest width and degree of curvefrom the waist to the crotch line (Connell et al. 2006).To evaluate the manner in which the hip shapesof women varied across each size category, a Pearsonchi-squared test was performed.

4. Results and discussion

4.1. Body measurement comparisons

Frequency distribution was rst used to establish thenumber of SizeUSA subjects who satised ASTM bust,waist and hip measurements (ASTM measurement71.0 inches to ASTM measurement 0.9999 inches)for each size category 14W32W. All the SizeUSAwomen from our sample who satised the bust, waistand hip measurements for each size category accordingto ASTM standards were selected and placed in the

appropriate size category. For example, bust measure-ments for size 14W included those subjects with a bustmeasurement of 38.5 inches to 41.4999 inches, waistmeasurements from 30.5 inches to 33.4999 inches, andhip measurements from 40.5 inches to 43.4999 inches.Based on data for size 14W, 1080 subjects satised theASTM bust measurement, 1135 satised the waistmeasurement, and 1321 satised the hip measurement(Table 2). Of these subjects who satised the bust,waist and hip measurements of size 14W, only 385satised both the bust and waist measurements, 336satised the waist and hip measurements, and only 120subjects satised all three bust, waist and hipmeasurements according to ASTM standards. Resultsin plus-sizes categories 14W32W showed that as thesize increases from 14W to 32W, a lower number ofwomen satised all three or at least two of themeasurements according to the ASTM standards.These overwhelming discrepancies between measure-ments can help explain why many women aredissatised with the t of ready-to-wear apparel.

Initial frequencies were performed to groupSizeUSA women from our sample that satised thebust measurements according to ASTMD-6960-04 intoeach size category 14W32W. For each size category,corresponding mean waist and hip measurements wereextracted and tested against the ASTM standards foreach size category. One sample t-tests (Table 3) showthat for all size categories, the corresponding waist andhip measurements were signicantly dierent from thestandards (p 5 0.05). The mean actual waist measure-ments were higher than ASTM standards for all thesizes from 14W to 32W and were statistically signicant(p 5 0.05). The mean waist measurements were biggerthan the ASTM standards by about two inches for allsize categories (S.D. ranging from 1.92 inches to S.D.

Table 2. Number of women in the SizeUSA sample who satised bust, waist, and hip measurements according to ASTMstandards (ASTM D-6960-04).

ASTMbust

SizeUSAwomen who

satisfy the bustmeasurements

ASTMwaist

SizeUSAwomen who

satisfy the waistmeasurements

SizeUSAwomen whosatisfy the

bust & waistmeasurements

ASTMhips

SizeUSAwomen whosatisfy the hipmeasurements

SizeUSAwomen whosatisfy the

waist and hipmeasurements

SizeUSAwomen whosatisfy thebust, waistand hip

measurements

14W 39.5 1080 31.5 1135 385 41.5 1321 336 12016W 41.5 878 33.5 926 261 43.5 992 206 5818W 43.5 712 35.5 805 204 45.5 625 134 3320W 45.5 503 37.5 641 150 47.5 407 88 2422W 47.5 339 39.5 447 86 49.5 231 36 924W 49.5 255 41.5 326 70 51.5 179 30 1126W 51.5 164 43.5 242 37 53.5 112 20 428W 53.5 102 45.5 165 23 55.5 45 11 230W 55.5 53 47.5 111 6 57.5 32 10 032W 57.5 19 49.5 57 6 59.5 24 3 0


Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

2.37 inches). The mean hip measurements were alsosignicantly dierent for all sizes (p5 0.05); they werelower than the standard and there was a largervariation in the manner in which the actual hipmeasurement varied against the ASTM standards foreach size category. The manner in which the hipmeasurements vary according to the ASTM standardsfor each apparel size 14W32W was less uniform thanthe waist. However, it was observed that there is ageneral tendency for the hip measure to be lower thanASTM standard as the size increased. This was true forall sizes from 14W32W.

SizeUSA women from our sample who satised thehip measurements according to ASTMD-6960-04 werealso grouped into each size category 14W32W. Foreach size category, corresponding mean waist and bustmeasurements were extracted and tested against theASTM standards for each size category. The hipmeasurement of the ASTM standards and the actualmean of the hip sizes of the SizeUSA subjects weresignicantly dierent for sizes 14W20W and 24W26W. ASTM standards and the actual mean of the hipsizes for 22W and 28W32W were not signicantly

dierent from the SizeUSA subjects. Table 4 shows theresults of one sample t-tests; it can be observed that forall size categories, the corresponding mean waistmeasurements were signicantly dierent from thestandards (p 5 0.05). The mean waist sizes werebigger than the ASTM standards by about two inchesfor all size categories (S.D. ranging from 3.34 inches toS.D. 4.18 inches). Bust measurement comparison toASTM standards reected discrepancies in both thesmaller and larger sizes. For sizes 14W and 16W,women have bigger measurements than standard, andfor sizes 26W, 30W and 32W the observed mean bustmeasurements were smaller than the standard. Still, forsizes 18W24W, and size 28W, the mean bustmeasurement of the sample and the standard werenot signicantly dierent (p 4 0.05).

4.2. Hip shape variations

SizeUSA women from our sample who were classiedas plus-size were extracted from the SizeUSA databasebased on their hip measurement and were categorisedinto each size group 14W32W. These women were

Table 3. Comparing the SizeUSAbust measurements within each size category to the corresponding waist and hipmeasurements based on ASTM D-6960-04 (one sample t-tests).

Size N

Bust Waist Hips

ASTM Mean S.D. p-value ASTM Mean S.D. p-value ASTM Mean S.D. p-value

14W 1080 39.5 39.46 0.57 0.077 31.5 32.91 1.97 0.000 41.5 41.27 2.52 0.00316W 878 41.5 41.49 0.58 0.745 33.5 34.89 1.99 0.000 43.5 42.33 2.90 0.00018W 712 43.5 43.46 0.57 0.133 35.5 36.95 2.01 0.000 45.5 43.57 3.08 0.00020W 503 45.5 45.51 0.58 0.621 37.5 39.11 1.99 0.000 47.5 44.88 3.36 0.00022W 339 47.5 47.41 0.57 0.009 39.5 41.34 2.21 0.000 49.5 46.44 3.60 0.00024W 255 49.5 49.42 0.56 0.046 41.5 43.31 2.31 0.000 51.5 48.64 3.82 0.00026W 164 51.5 51.48 0.56 0.751 43.5 45.58 1.92 0.000 53.5 49.92 3.96 0.00028W 102 53.5 53.45 0.60 0.425 45.5 47.80 2.21 0.000 55.5 52.35 4.61 0.00030W 53 55.5 55.37 0.53 0.058 47.5 50.27 2.37 0.000 57.5 54.53 4.27 0.00032W 19 57.5 57.33 0.61 0.250 49.5 51.85 1.99 0.000 59.5 55.81 5.01 0.005

Table 4. Comparing the SizeUSA hip measurements within each size category to the corresponding bust and waistmeasurements based on ASTM D-6960-04 (one sample t-tests).

Size N

Hip Waist Bust

ASTM Mean S.D. p-value ASTM Mean S.D. p-value ASTM Mean S.D. p-value

14W 1319 41.5 41.44 0.57 0.000 31.5 33.53 3.34 0.000 39.5 39.95 3.31 0.00016W 991 43.5 43.43 0.57 0.000 33.5 35.66 3.73 0.000 41.5 41.94 3.57 0.00018W 625 45.5 45.42 0.56 0.002 35.5 37.49 3.54 0.000 43.5 43.49 3.52 0.94820W 407 47.5 47.42 0.57 0.006 37.5 39.73 3.93 0.000 45.5 45.66 3.64 0.36122W 231 49.5 49.44 0.61 0.185 39.5 42.14 3.86 0.000 47.5 47.62 3.75 0.60924W 179 51.5 51.39 0.60 0.020 41.5 43.67 3.73 0.000 49.5 49.54 3.49 0.87326W 112 53.5 53.37 0.53 0.017 43.5 45.70 3.92 0.000 51.5 50.87 3.31 0.04728W 45 55.5 55.46 0.63 0.736 45.5 47.28 4.18 0.006 53.5 52.50 3.94 0.09830W 32 57.5 57.50 0.50 0.992 47.5 48.64 3.50 0.074 55.5 53.80 2.82 0.00232W 24 59.5 59.33 0.56 0.160 49.5 51.09 3.88 0.056 57.5 55.86 3.58 0.036


Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

also categorised into one of the four BSAS hip shapecategories: High Hip, Mid Hip, Low Hip and StraightHip. To evaluate the manner in which the hip shapes ofwomen varied across each size category, a Pearsonschi-squared test was performed (Table 5). The ChiSquare test results X-squared 550.2398, df 15,p 5 0.001. For hip sizes 24W32W, the cells werecombined, as the counts within some cells for Low Hipwere less than 5 (Figure 2).

The results indicate that dierent hip shapes existwithin each size from 14W to 32W for our SizeUSAsample. More women had greater fullness at the low ormid hip in the smaller sizes, and as women increased insize they were more likely to lose the fullness at low ormid hip and reect fullness at the high hip or show astraight hip. Measurements denote that the widest partof the lower body may not always be around the hipsas women increase in size. These changes indicate thechanging hip shape of the plus-size female consumer toa fuller mid-section and narrower, less curvy lower hiparea.

5. Conclusions and implications

Consumers bodies change in a variety of ways that arenot uniform across the dierent body areas. As womengain weight, the widest part of the body may notalways be around the hips as it is often assumed. As aresult, plus-size women often have trouble nding well-tting clothing. This research gives early indication ofthe need to revise the plus-sized sizing categories withinthe lower body dimensions of waist and hip measure-ments due to womens changing hip shape. Results alsovalidate that dierent hip shapes exist within a givensize. By integrating this information into their gar-ments, manufacturers and retailers could gain addi-tional customers and increased satisfaction and salesby working with the true consumers dimensions andhip shape. Furthermore, adding some additional hipshape information along with their sizing charts wouldhelp consumers nd a better garment t. Research hasindicated that the use of body shapes along with bodymeasurements greatly helps not only consumers, but

Table 5. Hip shape variations within each size category for SizeUSA women.

Hip size

Hip shape

Total (%)Straight hip (%) High-hip (%) Mid-hip (%) Low-hip (%)

Size 14W 240 (18.2) 208 (15.7) 347 (39.8) 526 (39.8) 1321 (100)Size 16W 198 (20) 180 (18.1) 362 (36.5) 252 (25.4) 992 (100)Size 18W 114 (18.2) 151 (24.2) 272 (43.5) 88 (14.1) 625 (100)Size 20W 89 (21.9) 112 (27.5) 171 (42) 35 (8.6) 407 (100)Size 22W 64 (27.7) 80 (34.6) 77 (33.3) 10 (4.3) 231 (100)Size 24W 42 (23.5) 68 (38) 64 (35.8) 5 (2.8) 179 (100)Size 26W 32 (28.6) 56 (50) 21 (18.8) 3 (2.7) 112 (100)Size 28W 13 (28.9) 23 (51.1) 9 (20.9) 0 (0) 45 (100)Size 30W 5 (15.6) 22 (68.8) 5 (15.6) 0 (0) 32 (100)Size 32W 7 (29.2) 11 (45.8) 6 (25) 0 (0) 24 (100)Total (%) 804 (20.3) 911 (23) 1334 (33.6) 919 (23.2) 3968 (100)

Figure 2. Visual representation of hip shape variation.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

also the manufacturer understand womens sizingbetter (Lee et al. 2007). For the consumer, this includesadding some type of body shape information to thesize label or description. Chun-Yoon and Jasper (1995)and Faust and Carrier (2010) concluded that femalesubjects preferred a labelling system that included apictogram or visual representation to one without.

This research investigated the general category ofplus-sized womens clothing. Due to the large numberof women over the age of 55 and increased racialdiversity of the American population, additionalresearch should further focus on these niche marketsto better understand them and meet their individualneeds. Future studies should also explore how the bust,waist and hip measurements of women vary in thepetite and tall size categories. With the variety of bodyshapes and increased presence of tted clothing, t is acontinual problem that needs to be addressed (Bye andLaBat 2005). It is evident that consumers are lookingfor companies to cater to their wants and needsincluding the changing shape of their bodies. Theseconsumers are ready to spend money on apparel withretailers and designers who are willing to incorporatetheir changing plus-size body shape into the companysapparel oerings. If apparel made for the plus-sizemarket reects their actual shape and measurements,consumers in this market would be able to wear morecomfortable, attering, stylish clothes that have abetter t. Catering to this growing US market wouldbe a good investment of time and money for apparelretailers, designers and manufacturers who are willingto commit to todays plus-size consumers.

References

ASTM, 2004. D6960-04, standard table of body measure-ments relating to womens plus size gure type, sizes14W32W. In ASTM Book of Standards (vol. 07).Available from: www.astm.org/standards/D6960.htm[Accessed 11 June 2008].

Alexander, M., Connell, L.J., and Presley, A.B., 2005.Clothing t preferences of young female adult consu-mers. International Journal of Clothing Science andTechnology, 17 (1), 5264.

Apeagyei, P.R., 2008. Signicance of body image among UKfemale fashion consumers: the cult of size zero, theskinny trend. International Journal of Fashion Design,Technology and Education, 1 (1), 311.

Ashdown, S., 1998. An investigation of the structure of sizingsystems: a comparison of three multidimensional opti-mized sizing systems generated from anthropometricdata with the ASTM Standard D5585-94. InternationalJournal of Clothing Science and Technology, 10 (5), 324341.

Bond, P., 2004. Sizing it up; new data could revamp sizingstandards, but is the industry ready to get out itsmeasuring tape? [online]. WWD, 31 March, 68S. Avail-able from: http://www.accessmylibrary.com/archive/3952-wwd/march-2004.html [Accessed 26 June 2010].

Brown, P. and Rice, J., 2001. Ready-to-wear apparel analysis.3rd ed. New Jersey: Prentice-Hall.

Bye, E. and LaBat, K., 2005. An analysis of apparel industryt sessions. Journal of Textile and Apparel, Technologyand Management, 4 (3), 15.

Chun-Yoon, J. and Jasper, C.R., 1995. Consumer preferencesfor size description systems ofmens andwomens apparel.The Journal of Consumer Aairs, 29 (2), 429441.

Cliord, S., 2010. A plus-size retail revelation: bigger womenhave cash, too. New York Times, 19 June. A1 (L).Available from: http://macysalumnigroup.blogspot.com/2010/06/plus-size-revalation-big-women-have.html [Ac-cessed 6 July 2010].

Connell, L.J., et al., 2006. Body shape assessmentscale: instrument development for analyzing femalegures. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 24 (2),8095.

Faust, M.E. and Carrier, S., 2010. Womens wear sizing: anew labeling system. Journal of Fashion Marketing andManagement, 14 (1), 88126.

Flegal, K.M., et al., 2010. Prevalence and trends in obesityamong US adults, 19992008. Journal of the AmericanMedical Association, 303 (3), 235241. Available from:http://jama.ama-assn.org/cgi/content/full/303/3/235 [Ac-cessed 6 July 2010].

Jackson, K.M., 2006. 0 is the new 8: as waistlines grow,womens clothing sizes shrink incredibly [online]. TheBoston Globe, 5 May. Available from: http://www.boston.com [Accessed 28 July 28 2010].

Jones, M.R. and Giddings, V.L., 2010. Tall womens satisfac-tion with the t and style of tall womens clothing. Journalof Fashion Marketing and Management, 14 (1), 5871.

Just-style.com, 2007. Outsize is in, but will apparel retailerslatch on? [online]. Just-style.com, 20 July. Available from:http://www.just-style.com/analysis/outsize-is-in-but-will-apparel-retailers-latch-on_id97977.aspx [Accessed 28July 2010].

Keiser, S.J. and Garner, M.B., 2008. Beyond design: thesynergy of apparel product development. New York:Fairchild Publications.

Kurt Salmon Associates, 2000. Annual consumer outlooksurvey. Paper presented at the American Apparel andFootwear Association apparel research committee,Orlando, FL.

Kurt, Salmon Associates, 2010. A Lack of Plus-SizeProfessional Clothing [online]. Kurt Salmon Associates.Available from: http://www.kurtsalmon.com/news.php?id61 [Accessed 14 July 2010].

Lee, J.Y., et al., 2007. Comparison of body shape betweenUSA and Korean women. International Journal ofClothing Science and Technology, 19 (5), 374391.

Levi Strauss & Co., 2010. Levis1 brand introduces revolu-tionary t system that focuses on shape, not size [online].Levi Strauss & Co. Available from: http://www.levistrauss.com/news/press-releases/levi-s-brand-introduces-revolutionary-t-system-focuses-shape-not-size [Accessed30 September 2010].

Manuel, M.B., Connell, L.J., and Presley, A.B., 2010. Bodyshape and t preference in body cathexis and clothingbenets sought for professional African-American wo-men. International Journal of Fashion Design, Technol-ogy, and Education, 3 (1), 2532.

Njagi, R.K. and Zwane, P.E., 2011. Variation in measure-ments across dierent brands of same style ladies pantsin Swaziland. International Journal of Fashion Design,Technology, and Education, 4 (1), 5157.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

Ogden, C.L., et al., 2004.Mean body weight, height, and bodymass index, United States 19602002 [online]. Hyattsville,Maryland: National Center for Health Statistics. Ad-vance data from vital and health statistics no 347.Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/ad/ad347.pdf [Accessed 25 April 2011].

Pisut, G. and Connell, L.J., 2007. Fit preferences of femaleconsumers in the USA. Journal of Fashion Marketing andManagement, 11 (3), 366379.

Ross, T., 2003. A tting solution [online]. Apparel, August, p.4244. Available from: http://www.apparelmag.com [Ac-cessed 8 October 2010].

Silverman, D., 2009. Body and image: the challenge of plussize [online]. WWD, 21 January, p. 19. Availablefrom: http://www.wwd.com/business-news/body-and-image-the-challenge-of-plus-size-1934097?fulltrue [Ac-cessed 6 July 2010].

Simmons, K.P., Istook, C.L., and Devarajan, P., 2004.Female gure identication technique (FFIT) for appa-rel, part II: development of shape sorting software.Journal of Textile and Apparel Technology and Manage-ment, 4 (1), 116.

[TC]2, 2004. SizeUSA report. Cary, North Carolina: TC2.Trust for Americas Health & the Robert Wood Johnson

Foundation, 2009. F as in fat 2009: obesity policies arefailing in Americas future America [online]. Trust forAmericas Health & the Robert Wood Johnson Founda-tion. Available from: http://healthyamericans.org/re-ports/ obesity2009/ [Accessed 7 July 2010].

Trust for Americas Health & the Robert Wood JohnsonFoundation, 2010. F as in fat 2010: how obesity threatensAmericas future [online]. Trust for Americas Health &the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation. Available from:http://healthyamericans.org/reports/obesity2010/ [Ac-cessed 7 July 2010].

UPI, NewsTrack, 2010. Fashion: plus sizes a growth area[online]. UPI NewsTrack, 19 June. Available from:http://www.upi.com/Business_News/2010/06/19/Fashion-Plus-sizes-a-growth-area/UPI-24601276978913/ [Accessed6 July 2010].

Workman, J.E., 1991. Body measurement specications fort models as a factor in clothing size variation. Clothingand Textiles Research Journal, 10 (1), 3136.


Dow

nloa

ded

by [9

5.77.1

09.18

6] at

05:46

29 Ja

nuary

2015

investigating womens plus-size body measurements and hip shape variation based on sizeusa data, 2011

Documents