Since it is an extreme color, red clothing might not help people in negotiations or confrontations. Red cars are popular targets for thieves. In decorating, red is usually used as an accent. Decorators say that red furniture should be perfect since it will attract attention.
Pink: The most romantic color, pink, is more tranquilizing. Sports teams sometimes paint the locker rooms used by opposing teams bright pink so their opponents will lose energy.
Blue: The color of the sky and the ocean, blue is one of the most popular colors. It causes the opposite reaction as red. Peaceful, tranquil blue causes the body to produce calming chemicals, so it is often used in bedrooms.
Blue can also be cold and depressing. Fashion consultants recommend wearing blue to job interviews because it symbolizes loyalty. People are more productive in blue rooms. Studies show weightlifters are able to handle heavier weights in blue gyms. Green: Green symbolizes nature. It is the easiest color on the eye and can improve vision. It is a calming, refreshing color. Hospitals often use green because it relaxes patients. Brides in the Middle Ages wore green to symbolize fertility. Dark green is masculine, conservative, and implies wealth.
Yellow: Cheerful sunny yellow is an attention getter. While it is considered an optimistic color, people lose their tempers more often in yellow rooms, and babies will cry more.
The attire of the punk movement, which consists of bold hair, ripped clothing and dark colors, can be seen as the curse words of dress. In verbal speech, slang and curse words often become accepted parts of the language, and the same occurs for clothing. Mismatched, random articles of clothing and wild, messy hair gives the mark of insanity.
On the other hand, a polished, matching, expensive suit identifies the person as wealthy, professional and together. Our culture believes strongly in first impressions. Long before you are close enough to someone to speak to them, you are aware of what they look like. What someone wears can be an instant marker of age, gender and class.
It can also give information as to profession, ethnicity, mood and background. We all consciously and subconsciously absorb the information others give us via their clothing, and create opinions based on attire. We also carefully choose our outfits depending on how we want to appear to others.
If fashion is a language, and therefore a way of communicating, then clothing is the medium through which we send messages to other people. Whether the message others receive was what we intended or not, we dress with intention. While a designer may have created an article of clothing for one intention, someone may buy it with another intention. The meaning that is put into clothing during production changes drastically by the time it is perceived by someone passing by on the street.
All clothing sends a message, whether we intend it to or not. It expresses every aspect of an individual. In order for people to respond to us the way we want, we must understand how our clothing is a representation of who we are and what we communicate through what we wear. Fashion is often used to create a sense of community amongst a group of people, and to separate between those in the group and those outside the group.
The traditional white robe with a pointed hood acts as a way for Ku Klux Klan members to differentiate themselves from the rest of the culture and recognize other group members.
Wearing a t-shirt stamped with a brand name lets others know that you identify with that brand and whatever reputation comes along with it. In the well loved movie Mean Girls, the popular girls of North Shore High School have very strict rules about what they could wear. We only wear jeans or track pants on Fridays. This design was readily noticeable in the black and white photographs.
Two of the photographs taken in these two ensembles were matched for posture leg and body positions and facial expressions. These served as stimulus-objects to be viewed by subjects who were students at The Pennsylvania State University in Fall, Booklets containing one photograph and a questionnaire were randomly distributed in classes. The questionnaire elicited information about personal characteristics of the subject e.
Subjects were asked to pretend they had just seen the woman walking on campus and were asked for their first impressions of her. A six-point scale ranging from "definitely yes" to "definitely no" was available for subject responses. This procedure was similar to the one described by Holbrook and Hughes Informed consent [Prior to completing the questionnaire, subjects read a general description of the study which omitted any reference to clothing.
This statement had been approved by a University committee as a reasonable procedure. Subjects were promised, and given, a thorough debriefing after all questionnaires were collected. The complete list of attributional descriptors as presented to subjects who were asked to complete the phrase "The woman in the photograph A multivariate analysis of variance MANOVA was performed to test the hypothesis of no difference in the attributions to the two stimulus objects across a linear combination of all attributes Barr et al.
Table 3 contains t-values and probabilities. As can be seen, only one attribute, "does not smoke cigarettes" produced a t significant at or beyond the. The finding, that one out of thirty-three attributes is significant at or beyond the. Thus it is possible to conclude that there were no genuine differences in the perceptions of the model as she was dressed in clothing ensembles which differed only in terms of the fabric pattern for a sweater. This study has demonstrated an approach to study of apparel as communication that could be generalized to study of.
Holbrook and Hughes Because the data report a comparison of only two clothing ensembles, essentially a test of a single clothing attribute, one would need to be very cautious in concluding that features of clothing fabric are unimportant in interpersonal communication.
Yet within the limitations of the current study, that was the case. If nothing else, the study demonstrates an approach that may be taken in further studies of clothing, each of which could add empirical evidence to the hypothesis that fabric features are less important than form features in clothing as communication.
Further research on clothing following that presented here would need to establish the generalizability of the finding that cloth pattern is of no significance in the context of first impression attributions about another. In order to do this it would be necessary to determine that the findings were consistent across the following possible sources of variation:. A complex factorial design using the same structured projective technique used here could accomplish the goal of determining the boundaries of the theory relating clothing form, cloth pattern, and first impression attributions.
The paper has defined an area of study -- apparel as communication. It presented a taxonomy of apparel organized around the functions that apparel may serve. The paper discussed the necessary and sufficient conditions for apparel to become communicative and suggested types of apparel that would and would not satisfy these conditions.
A discussion of research on apparel as communication reviewed previous studies, characterized some of their weaknesses from a theory-building perspective, and identified four communication perspectives for building theories of apparel as communication. An empirical investigation of clothing as communication illustrated some of the features of research discussed previously.
Although the results of that study were modest, they did suggest directions for further research on clothing. Clearly the study of apparel as communication is in its infancy. As outlined in the current paper, there are vast gaps in the body of knowledge concerning the topic. It is surprising that more attention has not been directed at the area because of its impact upon first impression formation and management e.
Perhaps it is now time to study these product-based systems of communication with the same enthusiasm previously given the purely body-based systems.
Larry L. Barker and Nancy B. Emmert and W. Brooks Boston: Houghton Mifflin, Anthony J. Barr, James H. Goodnighl, John P. Sall, and Jane T. Russell W. George E. Norma H. Robert D. John M. Helen I. Robert Dubin, Theory Building revised ed. New York: The Free Press, Starkey Duncan, Jr. Paul Ekman and W. Paul N. Robert G. Harper, Arthur N.
Wiens, and Joseph D. Morris B. Holbrook and Nevill C. Rebecca H. Mark L. Knapp, Nonverbal Communication in Human Inter action 2nd ed. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston, Thomas E. Lasswell and Peter F. Monroe Lefkowitz, Robert R. Sales from our online store help fund the work of EPM and free us up to continue giving away the royalties from Randy's books.
Please note that due to supply issues and shipping delays, your order may take longer than normal to arrive this holiday season. Thank you for your support and patience. What Does Your Clothing Communicate? By Nancy DeMoss Wolgemuth.
What Not To Wear article June 27, First and foremost, your clothing ought to be becoming, fitting to, and consistent with your character as a child of God. But it also ought to be becoming to your body type, becoming to your femininity, becoming to your husband, becoming to the other clothes you are wearing, and becoming to the occasion and place you intend to wear it.
Avoiding frontal hugs is one of the ways a man can pursue modesty and sexual purity. We deeply appreciate our customers. Thank you for being a vital part of our ministry!
0コメント