Abstract

Making a decision about what to wear on a daily basis is a choice that people worldwide have to make. The research examines the concepts and ideas behind one's self-presentation, and suggests certain characteristics and personality traits that can be assumed about a woman based on her choice of clothing. Both men and women college students participated in the study. Results suggest that male and females have many of the same perceptions of a woman based on her attire.

Fashion, though in a strange way, represents all manly virtues. It is virtue gone to seed: it is kind of posthumous honor. It does not often caress the great, but the children of the great: it is the hall of the Past.

--Emerson (Stoneley, 1999).

Even in the 1800's, fashion and choice of clothing was an issue that was very important to individuals, particularly women. Louisa May Alcott, the author of Little Women, is one example of a woman who was aware of fashion and just how important it was, not only to herself, but to others as well. As Alcott became increasingly famous in the 1880's, she was aware that she had to project a certain and deceptive image to society, one of cheerfulness and beauty. This image was difficult for Alcott to achieve, after many years of bad health and hard work. Through the manipulation of fashion, she was forced to represent herself in a way that would sell to the audience (Stoneley, 1999, p. 21).

This is just one example of the relevance that fashion and clothing have on an individual's self-presentation. In society, what one chooses to wear is noticed by many people, and may be cause for certain presumptions to be made about the individual. Particular connections between a woman's choice of clothing and what others may think of her can help be explained by first providing a foundation of theoretical ideas.

Three closely related concepts that help to explain why humans behave in certain ways, and to be more particular, why humans present themselves in certain ways, are self-presentation, self-monitoring, and impression management. Erving Goffman, a sociologist, has in great length examined both self-presentation and impression management. According to Littlejohn (1992), Goffman puts the way that people behave into a theatrical metaphor, as he compares people to actors, who construct performances to make a distinctive impression on the audience, and to establish certain meanings of themselves and the situation. This can also be referred to as dramatization, which is based on the role-playing of individuals. In all types of interactions, whether focused or unfocused, the presentation of one's self is necessary to establish what others will make of the performance. In the 1982 New York Times obituary of Goffman, it was stated that, "People are essentially performers whose main business is fabricating an identity" (Snyder, 1987, p.10). Goffman also uses the term "performance," which refers to "all the activity of an individual which occurs during a period marked by his continuous presence before a particular set of observers and which has some influence on the observers (1959, p. 22). Furthermore, the term "personal front" becomes relevant, as it refers to the items of one's performance which function to help define the situation, in either a general or fixed fashion. The most common elements of personal front include clothing, sex, age, race, size, and looks (22).

To be more precise and create a meaning of interpersonal communication that is more understandable, Goffman arranges his ideas into more defined theoretical limits. He begins with the assumption that when a person faces a situation, he or she must organize the events that are taking place, and make a reality of the moment. This process takes place in two parts, and is referred to as the definition of the situation. The first element of defining a situation is for one to obtain information about the other person(s) in the situation. The second element takes place when a person(s) supplies information about himself or herself, which allows for others to make a meaning of the information that is being presented.

Two important terms that Goffman introduces in reference to defining a situation are strips and frames, which refer to the two elements described above. The information being obtained is known as a strip, and the explanation of the strip is called a frame. For example, a possible strip could be if one opens a closet door, takes out a pair of pants and a sweater, and then puts them on. In this case, the frame might be classified as "getting dressed." Frame analysis is extremely important to Goffman's ideas of why people present information and interact with one another in certain ways, and allows for the understanding and examination of events to take place. There are two possible frame types, which are natural frameworks and social frameworks. A natural framework refers to random and uncontrollable acts of nature that one must accept and manage the best that they can under the unknown circumstances. On the other hand, a social framework is classified as events that happen to an individual that are controllable. To combine both natural and social frameworks, the term primary framework can be used, which is the basic unit that when,

"Taken all together in a particular social group constitute a central element of its culture, especially insofar as understandings emerge concerning principal classes of schemata, the relations of these classes to one another, and the sum total of forces and agents that these interpretive designs acknowledge to be loose in the world" (Littlejohn, 1992, p.182).

Keeping the theoretical details of self-presentation in mind, the idea of impression management can be introduced. Allison and Herlocker (1994) refer to impression management as "people's efforts to control the impressions that others form of them"(637). The theories of self-presentation and impression management are very much interlinked and interdependent of one another, since one's self-presentation will project a certain impression on others (Littlejohn, 1992, p. 183). Beginning with Goffman, the first of three levels of impression management theory was created. This first level provided a foundation for further research to take place, as well as a base that other scholars could refer to. The second and middle layer expanded the past investigations of Goffman, and "brought the area of impression management into the mainstream of social and personality psychology" (Allison & Herlocker, 1994, p. 638). The third and last layer is one that focuses on the impact of impression management in mostly organizational settings, which does not particularly apply to this study.

From Mark Snyder, a third concept, self-monitoring, can be introduced. The theoretical ideas behind self-presentation and impression management encouraged Snyder to look further into the two notions, as he wanted to answer two specific questions: "Do People actively attempt to control the images they convey to others during social interaction?" and "What are the consequences of adopting or not adopting this strategic orientation to interpersonal relationships" (p. 5)?

To begin empirical research that would be valid and dependable, Snyder produced the Self-Monitoring Scale of twenty-five units, which would be able to classify people as either high self-monitors or low self-monitors. Simply put, Snyder groups high self-monitors as those individuals who control their self-image to a great extent, and low self-monitors as those who do not. Low self-monitors do not change the way that they act or feel often, and changes of environment do not really influence them. High self-monitors, on the other hand, tend to change their personality, depending on their surroundings. For example, at work, one may appear completely different than at home.

According to Messick and Mackie, one fact is clear: people are quick to mentally assign the individuals they encounter to one or more social, racial, or gender categories," as quoted in Allison & Herlocker (1994, p. 639). When individuals observe others, certain qualities such as age, gender, and other physical cues will cause for certain meanings and assumptions to be made. Fiske and Neuberg state that the categorization of human beings provides perceivers with a rapid and informative picture of others and that this is what causes for first impressions to be formed. Within just the first few minutes of human interaction, an impression is formed. Over eighty five percent of these impressions are based solely on visible cues such as clothing worn, body type, and hair style (Crutsinger & Seitz, 1991, p. 23). To be more precise, it is noted by Kaiser (1985) that clothing itself is one of the most essential ingredients to impression formation, and that judging others based on clothing is done both consciously and subconsciously, which corresponds to Goffman's idea of focused and unfocused situations. In a focused situation, such as a face-to-face encounter, individuals are focused on one another and mutual activity takes place. On the other end of the spectrum, and unfocused interaction takes place sometimes subconsciously, as people acknowledge that others are present, but do not pay close, or any, attention to them (Littlejohn, 1992, p. 182).

Methodology

The population from which data were gathered was men and women from the Pinney Hall dormitory at Western Connecticut State University. There were ten female respondents, as well as ten male respondents.

A questionnaire was created which consisted of a handout that had five pictures of women, wearing different outfits (see appendix one). For each picture, there were five pairs of bipolar adjectives, and a scale between one and ten points for each set of adjectives. On the scale, one was the lowest which represented a positive response and ten was the highest, representing a negative response. Respondents were asked to characterize each of the five women using the scales provided for each trait, and were also asked where they assumed the women would wear each outfit. There was also a space provided for any additional comments and responses that the participants may have had. In the questionnaire, the bipolar adjectives provided for each picture were virginal/sexual; work/play; expensive taste/cheap taste; self-confident/shy; and interesting/dull. These descriptions were chosen based on a preliminary questionnaire that was given to two males and two females. The four students chosen were given four of the pictures and asked to generate and write down the first three adjectives or characteristics that came to mind, after viewing just the clothing worn by the women in the photos. Lastly, the five adjectives were separated and divided onto positive and negative sides. The positive adjectives were virginal, work, expensive taste, self-confident, and interesting, where as the negative adjectives were sexual, play, cheap taste, shy, and dull. After getting all of the results, an average for both the men and women respondents was calculated for each adjective. The second step was then to average all of the male and female averages to establish one final average for each, in the hopes of distinguishing whether or not there were any variations between the results of the men and women.

Results

The first step that the researcher took to arrange the results was to first put the pictures in order, based on most negative to most positive. This was done by using an overall average for each picture, which was completed by calculating an 'average of averages.' To accomplish this task, the researcher added the overall average of the male's responses for each picture to the overall average of the female's responses, and then divided that calculation by two.

Consequently, Picture #1 produced the most negative response of all, with an average of 6.21 points. For each adjective, the women had a more negative response, except for the self-confidence and shy category. Picture #3 generated the second most negative response, as it had an overall average of 5.72, and Picture #4 created the third most negative reply with a final result of 5.25 points. With an overall average of 4.115, Picture #2 generated the second to most positive response, and the women participants were more negative than the men in every scale except for the one of interesting/dull. Lastly, the most positive average concluded was 2.83 points from Picture #5.

In Pictures #1,2,4, and 5, the largest difference found between the opinions of the men and women fell in the category of interesting and dull. The exception to this was in Picture #3, as the biggest difference was in the classification of work versus play. The difference happened to be an exceptionally smaller difference than the responses between men and women in the interesting/dull category. The differences there were 4.4 points for Picture #1, 2.55 points for Picture #2, 2.4 points for Picture #4, and 3.1 points for Picture #5. This corresponds with the fact that of all of the pictures that were provided for respondents to judge, Picture #3 inspired the least amount of controversy. The males judged this woman more negatively than the females by only .44 points. In the work/play category, the average of the men was 5.1 and in the women's case, the average was 3.3. This shows that the men were very undecided as to whether or not this woman would wear this specific outfit while at her job, or in her time spent outside of work.

This idea also applies to the results for Picture #2, as the women were 2.1 points more confident that the outfit featured in this photograph would be worn outside of work.

For Picture #5, the second least amount of difference of opinion was found. The male's average response was 3.09 points and the female's average response was 2.57 points, a difference of only .52 points. This is probably due to the fact that of all the pictures, these were the two where the results in the work/play classification were most positive.

The women that were judged most sexual were the women in Pictures #1 and #2. This is also where the largest overall difference in opinion occurred between the men and women respondents, as the female's overall average for Picture #2 was 4.89 points and the male's was 3.34 points, a difference of 1.55 points. In Picture #1, the women's overall average was 6.88 points and the men's average was 5.54 points, causing a difference of 1.34.

DISCUSSION

Because the figures in Picture #3 and Picture #5 were presumed most likely to be going to work due to their attire, presumptions about their levels of self-monitoring can be made. Snyder states that people low in self-monitoring may choose careers that match their own personality type. Low self-monitors may choose professions that allow them to show warmth and compassion, such as any job that allows for them to "help" others. On the other hand, more assertive and confident individuals might opt for a job in business or law (86). On the majority of the questionnaires that were handed out, respondents felt that the woman in Picture #3 was a librarian, schoolteacher, or housewife. They also concluded that the woman was more shy than self-confident, with an overall average of 7.05 points in that category. When asked where the female in Picture #5 would wear that particular suit, it was specified that not only was she going to work, but that she worked in a corporate office, or a law office. Secondly, she was perceived as self-confident, as the overall average of participants was 3.35 points. Thus, it is possible that the woman in Picture #3 is low in self-monitoring, but that the woman in Picture #5 is high in self-monitoring.

"Just because most men give zero thought to their own wardrobe doesn't mean we haven't got fierce ideas about yours. Believe it or not, which fork you take on the fashion road can either kick us into overdrive or totally tank us," reports Jake a 'guy spy' for Glamour magazine (Sept. 2000, p. 164). Sexuality is another category used in the research that is a large element of society, and Jake also indicates that there are many aspects of a woman's appearance that "intended or not, are interpreted by (admittedly) wishful-thinking guys as definite 'I want sex' signals" (Sept. 2000). On the whole, Jake concluded that the main types of clothing that indicate a woman's interest in sexual encounters are items that tie or consists of strings, spaghetti-strap sandals or any footwear that is "barely there," and anything that accentuates the neck. Reported by Jake, his friend Rob insists that "nothing says 'Do me' more than a little strap or tie that says 'Undo me.' If she wears something with strings done up in a knot, you think, Mmm, present-must unwrap now." In regards to footwear, Jake remarks that "When men see spaghetti-strap sandals, flimsy mules or any of those barely-on-you shoes, we think zero-to-naked in 2.8 seconds." Finally, accessories that emphasize the neck are similar to a sign that reads "Place Lips Here."

Kaspar, a male mentioned in Jake's article, had a horrific experience when he made false assumptions about his date, due to her outfit and accessories. When Kaspar brought his date to his apartment and began making sexual overtures, she left in an angry manner, leaving Kaspar in disbelief. His response was, "What was I supposed to think? She had on those strappy sandals and one of those tops that has a front but no back, with this string of beads laced around her neck. All the signals were there! I mean, it was obvious."

This directly relates to the results of the study, since the two women in Picture #1 and Picture #2 were understood as the most interested in sex. The woman in Picture #1 is wearing a tiny shirt that ties right between her breasts, creating a lot of cleavage. Maybe this "tie" is part of the reason that she was judged as the most sexual. Do men look at her and think, "Untie me?" In Marie Claire magazine (2000), when twenty three year old Tyras was asked about the last time that he thought about sex, he answered, "A few minutes ago, I just saw a girl's midriff as she walked by. There's something about a woman's midriff and rear that's a turn on." Thus, maybe one of the underlying factors as to why Picture #1 was highest on the virginal/sexual scale was because her midriff was exposed.

Next, in Picture #2, a gold choker, as well as open-toe high heel shoes are observable. The khaki skirt also has a zipper that happens to be unzipped, and that reveals most of the woman's legs, so that other private areas are almost exposed. These three factors more than likely why she was judged as second to most sexual.

As Erving Goffman states in Gender Advertisements, "We learn a great deal about the disparate power of males and females simply through the body language and poses of advertising" (Kilbourne, 1999, p. 141). The last three words in this statement, "poses of advertising" bring about an additional factor that may have inspired certain responses to the pictures. Although the main emphasis of the study was to focus on the women's clothing and outfits, it is possible that particular poses, facial expressions, hairstyle and color, or other movements in the photos may have influenced the opinions of the respondents. In all of the pictures, there are factors such as these evident. In Picture #1, the event of the woman eating a cherry, along with her facial expression needs to be considered, as well as the pose of the woman in Picture #2, since her long legs are clearly revealed, and greatly emphasized by her skirt being unzipped to a high point. Thirdly, the woman in Picture #3 is standing with her legs slightly spread apart and her arms folded across her chest. Moving on the Picture #4, the pose noticeable here is also interesting, as well as the woman's facial expression. This also applies to Picture #5, as an intriguing look is apparent on this woman's face. Opinions about one's attitude are probably the main components of personality that could be biased from looking at one's facial expressions and, in this particular study, could have affected the averages on all of the five scales used to judge the women.

Conclusion

From the study, there are many things that the researcher learned. The study performed has provided a good foundation for further investigation into the subject of women's fashion, and the researcher can now conclude what might help to enhance the study in the future. Since only twenty students, ten males and ten females, at Western Connecticut State University completed the questionnaires, the results are very limited. Not only are the results among the population of college students restricted, more importantly, the outcome of the population as a whole is extremely limited. To the researcher's surprise, there was not a large difference between the outcomes of the males and females participants.

If the study was examined in greater depth, the researcher would have to get more responses, and from a greater variety of people. Also, now having a vast amount of background information, the researcher would know which types of pictures might provide the most contradicting responses from participants of the study.

On the whole, the appearance of an individual is a very important aspect of communication. Establishing and understanding the ideas of self-presentation and self-monitoring help to make sense of why humans tend to form opinions of others, and more precisely, why opinions are formed simply from what one chooses to wear. Keeping all of this in mind, one can begin to analyze the reasoning behind what is found in their closet.

References

(2000, September). Does he think you're up for sex, based on your clothes? Glamour, 162.

(2000, September). Can the way you dress kill a date? Glamour, 164.

Allison, S. & Herlocker, C. (1994). Constructing impressions in demographically diverse organizational settings. American Behavioral Scientist,37(5), 637-52.

Crutsinger, C. & Seitz, V.(1991, Fall). Investment dressing: Making sound decisions. The Journal of Home Economics,83, 23-27.

Goffman, E. (1959). The presentation of self in everyday life. New York: Doubleday & Co.

Kilbourne, J. (1999). Deadly Persuasion: Why women and girls must fight the addictive power of advertising. New York: The Free Press.

Littlejohn, S. (1992). Theories of human communication(4th ed.). California: Wadsworth Publishing Co.

Morgan, L. (2000, August). How often do you think about sex? Marie Claire, 86-90.

Snyder, M. (1986). Public appearances/private realities. New York: W.H. Freeman & Co.

Stoneley, P. (1999, Spring). The fashionable world displayed: Alcott and social power. Studies in American Fiction,27, 21-36.

Appendix One

Instructions: For each of the following five pictures, please use the scale provided to describe each woman. Circle the number from 1 to 10.

Picture #1:

Virginal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overly Sexual

Work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Play

Expensive taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Cheap Taste

Self-confident 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Shy

Interesting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dull

Where is this woman going in this outfit?__________________________________________________________

Comments/Responses:_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Picture #2:

Virginal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overly Sexual

Work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Play

Expensive taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Cheap Taste

Self-confident 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Shy

Interesting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dull

Where is this woman going in this outfit? __________________________________________________________

Comments/Responses:_______________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Picture #3:

Virginal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overly Sexual

Work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Play

Expensive taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Cheap Taste

Self-confident 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Shy

Interesting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dull

Where is this woman going in this outfit? __________________________________________________________

Comments/Responses: __________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Picture #4:

Virginal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overly Sexual

Work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Play

Expensive taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Cheap Taste

Self-confident 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Shy

Interesting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dull

Where is this woman going in this outfit?__________________________________________________________

Comments/Responses:_________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

Picture #5:

Virginal 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Overly Sexual

Work 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Play

Expensive taste 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Cheap Taste

Self-confident 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Shy

Interesting 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 Dull

Where is this woman going in this outfit?

Comments/Responses:__________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________