Applied psychology 2021

Thủy An, Thu An, Hà Linh, Bảo Ngọc

Bo dy Im ag e &
Cons um er
C u ltu re
The problem of sizing for
clothes presented by
Group 7
 Why
Local Brands?
 Why
Local Brands?
Thesis statement
Local brands strengthen the
traditional beauty desire via
social media performance and
limited sizing:
"The thinner, the better"
 Hypothesis
#1

Local brands only promote slim-fit models

#2

Brand's body image orientation hampers shopper's purchase decision

#3

Clothing sizes of local brands are for under-60-kilogram females

#4

Some consumer would be dissatisfied with the limited sizing of local brands
 ology
ethod
M
Market research Survey

200 responses after 2 days!!!

Size is j
ust for
55-kg g under- It depends!
irls. Ho Only people lack self-
ridiculo w Everyone could find
us!!! awareness that are
the appropriate
affected by those
brands branding showcase
Success Limitation
Attract many youngsters -
target customers of local brands

Respondent proactively outreach and

deeply share insights

Overlapping response

Insuffieciently representative of
youngster generation
 BODY IMAGE

A multidimensional construct encompassing

perceptions, attitudes, beliefs, feelings, and
behaviors regarding one’s appearance
(Cash, 2004).

1. Brand's body image

2. Customer's body image
BRAND'S BODY IMAGE:
SLIM-FIT ORIENTED


Most mannequins come in such a small size. When the clothes are draped over a small frame in a store
window, they look more appealing tendency to use models who are mannequin sized

Other companies are using skinny models gives them incentive to use skinny models too

-> Fit the trend, avoid standing out

 INFLUENCER
75% of marketers were using influencer marketing
(Augure 2015).
MARKETING
Most influencers in Vietnam have slim-fit body
figures

The consumer’s doppelganger effect: individuals

mimic others’ consumption behavior intentionally in
response to a desire to look or behave like those
they are modeling (Ruvio et al., 2013)

-> A message an SMI communicates is considered

authentic and trustworthy

-> Brands can communicate easily with large

audiences of target consumers, and increase target
consumers’ adoption of their products
 YES
Local fashion brands do strongly promote slim-fit models
 A N
HUM BILITY
CUSTOMER'S I R A
DES
TECHNOLOGICAL

BODY IMAGE
FEASIBILITY

e n c e r
Influ ing
Market
 3 factors

Individual perceptions of beauty: “a complex set

of influences on preferences, including socio-
cultural factors such as ideal body sizes and the
stigmatization of overweight or underweight”
(Drenten & Gurrieri 2018)
TECHNOLOGICAL
The social comparison theory: desire to be FEASIBILITY
validated by others, which consumers achieve by
either deliberate or unconscious comparison to
others (Festinger, 1954; Kinley, 2010)

Appearance ideals (reinforced by social media and

peers): Direct comments on social media post,
modeling, and social comparison reinforcing the
importance of the thin appearance ideals
(Tatangelo, McCabe & Ricciardelli 2015)
Survey data
If you cannot find a suitable size for the outfit in local brands then you will?

Not gonna buy the outfit

...

=> Limited the perception of body image of consumers

that they are not fit enough for the brands.
Most customers of these fashion local brands who tagged the
brands' names on Instagram are in slim-fit body figures.

=> Customers' body image has complied with the brand's

body image is slim-fit-oriented.
 YES
Brand's body image orientation hampers
shopper's purchase decision
The limited
availability
in sizes
Pose 3: Clothing sizes of local brands
are for under-60-kilogram females
 The 4 brands

MAMAVIRUS LIBÉ DOTTIE KIDO

210k Followers 614k Followers 400k Followers 446k Followers
Sexy style Girly style Elegant style Sporty, active style
 Limited Availability (Many sizes but not very diverse)
SOME FINDINGS:
- They have sizes from XS to XL
- Mostly are sizes S, M, L, and freesize
- But were that enough to tackle the
need of the shoppers?
However, those sizes are not diverse enough
for shoppers to choose from because:

(1)
Shops tend to use models with thin/slim/fit bodies to fit
the smallest size products to be photogenic and most
attractive both online and offline.
However, those sizes are not diverse enough
for shoppers to choose from because:

heir
(2)
The supply of large-size clothing is low.
Eg. L size products are usually out of stock, no product of
size XL displayed on website, etc.
(3) SIZES NO LARGER THAN S AND M
Mamavirus as they aim to sell tight, sexy, flattering outfits
for women so they don’t even have the L size, or just a few
of them for pants only.

(4) FREESIZE OUTFITS WOULD LOOK BEST ON

YOU IF YOU ARE FROM AROUND OR BELOW
60KG.
Freesize means only 1 size for particular
individuals with determined weight/height/body
type/ etc., instead of one-size-fits-all size.
 Secondly, local brand's sizing is smaller than
standardized clothing measurements.

By comparing the size tables of the 4 shops to the Vietnamese standardized size
tables, we found some limitations in the local brand's sizing. Which are:
From the size table of LIBÉ we can see that:
The size L of the brand is equal to the
standardized size M for those who are 1m65
tall or less, and weigh between 40 and 55kg.
 So, how does that
Limited Sizing
of local brands affect
customers?
self-related mental imagery
(SRMI)
The visualization of pictures and concrete words displayed in the brand's
advertisements (flyers, posters, online posts, ambassadors, etc) can
generate mental imagery and influence consumer attitudes as it makes
"consumers spontaneously imagine themselves using the product"
(566).

E.g., when seeing any outfits being worn by the model, we tend to imagine
ourselves wearing that too, and it will generate your self-comparison with
the models.

"IMAGINING THIN: WHY VANITY SIZING WORKS" (2012)

 self-related mental imagery

The customers
"Although there are small sizes, brands still have freesize designs. However, since
only slim models wear them, which make the freesize clothes look big and wide, but Do you want to lose/gain weight to fit in with the local brands' designed clothes?
for people who are slightly larger than the general weigh standard will be self-
deprecated."

Yes
No

"Although I'm not slim, I quite like the design of local brands so I still choose to buy it.
However, there are times when I feel a bit sad as I can't wear it as beautiful as the
model. So it's a bit self-deprecating."

=> So if the customers have low self-esteem or haven't fully develop their sense of identities yet
=> Easily be influenced by the ideal image of the thin models that brands are displaying for marketing.
 YES
Clothing sizes of local brands are for under-
60-kilogram females
Why some but not
the majority?
Pose 4: Some consumers would be
dissatisfied with the limited sizing of local
brands
The sizes are not
inclusive enough
 Statement:
Local brands for women are only for slim-fit people
Participants in Instagram and Facebook
- agree - either prospects or customers.
In total Participants on the Google Form -
disagree - mostly frequent shoppers
Answers 72 62 71 205
Those who often shop at local brands
Agree 28 45 48 121
indicate that stores have many sizes to
Disagree 44 17 23 84 accommodate a wider range of bodies.

Those who rarely or don't buy local

brands easily agree because of the
display of slim/fit models.
No
47.2% Yes
Do you often => General assumption: local brands only
52.8%
buy clothes at sell clothes for thin people, like their
local brands? models.
 YES
Some consumer would be dissatisfied with the
limited sizing of local brands
 Conclusion
#1

Local brands promote slim-fit models

#2

Brand's body image orientation hampers shopper's purchase decision

#3

Clothing sizes of local brands are for under-60-kilogram females

#4

Some consumer would be dissatisfied with the limited sizing of local brands

Sizing is not yet a social problem but

if we don't take action, it would be one day.
Solution
What can we do to minimize the effect of clothing size
on our decision and self-esteem?
 Marketing

“Are size-zero female (SM)

models always more effective
than average-sized (AM) ones?”
Depends on brand and self-esteem.
Using SM is not always more
appealing than AM as one would
expect.
Individual psychological differences
(consumers’ self-esteem levels).
SM does not increase advertising
effectiveness, model attractiveness,
and product evaluation.
HIGHER OUR
SELF-ESTEEM
Body
Types
NOT
Number
Universal size
 Vanity s i zi n g

Manipulation/altering of clothing size

to smaller sizes.
The smaller the clothing size, the better
they feel , create a stronger tendency to
purchase.
UNIVERSAL SIZE-CHART
Embrace
Differences
 Personalize
It might be more costly but fitter to
our body.

The store offers free fixing clothes

service, to enhance the customer's
experience & make them less
concern about their size.
Thank
you!
 References
Augure. 2015. The state of influencer engagement: 2015. https://www.launchmetrics.com/resources/
whitepapers/the-state-of-influencer-engagement-2015
Ruvio, A., Gavish, Y., & Shoham, A. (2013). Consumer’s doppelganger: A
role model perspective on intentional consumer mimicry. Journal Consumer Behaviour, 12(1), 60–69.
Bdresearch.org. 2021. TỔNG HỢP các bảng size quần áo nữ UK, US, EU và cách quy đổi chính xác | BD Research - Khoa học và đời
sống. [online] Available at: <https://www.bdresearch.org/bang-size-quan-ao-nu.html> [Accessed 29 December 2021].
Aydinoğlu, N. and Krishna, A., 2012. Imagining thin: Why vanity sizing works. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 22(4), pp.565-572.
TikTok. 2021. Jet REVIEW Local Brand on TikTok. [online] Available at:
<https://www.tiktok.com/@jetreview68/video/6989929516957256986?_t=8OZ3P1a1GSX&_r=1> [Accessed 29 December
2021].
Bian, X. and Wang, K., 2021. Are size-zero female models always more effective than average-sized ones?.
The Effect Of Clothing Size Manipulation And Social Comparison On Consumer Self-Esteem And Purchasing Decision
Drenten, J., & Gurrieri, L. (2017). Crossing the #bikinibridge. The Dark Side of Social Media, 49–70.
https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315167718-4
Festinger, L. (1954). A theory of social comparison processes. Human Relations, 7(2), 117–140.
https://doi.org/10.1177/001872675400700202
Tatangelo, G. L., McCabe, M. P., & Ricciardelli, L. A. (2015). Body image. International Encyclopedia of the Social & Behavioral
Sciences, 735–740. https://doi.org/10.1016/b978-0-08-097086-8.14062-0