Consumers With Disabilities

Abstract

As the presence of disabled consumers has become more prevalent in social and occupational life, attention to the clothing needs of consumers with disabilities has increased. However, research about disabled consumers and their dress behavior remains scant. This study is designed to understand disabled consumers’dress behavior, specifically clothing selection and meanings. In-depth interviews were conducted with 10 disabled consumers. Five themes emerged as important to understanding their clothing behaviors: form and function, self-expression, social identity, self-efficacy, and symbols of victory. Themes are discussed relative to the literature on apparel meaning and consumer behavior, and findings are discussed within the framework of self-efficacy theory. Potential implications of this study and directions for future research are discussed.

Keywords

disabled consumers clothing selection clothing use

Approximately one fifth of the U.S. population has some form of disability (U.S. Census Bureau, 2009). Because of physical or mental limitations, disabled individuals may engage in behaviors that are unlike those of others in society (Ittyerah & Kumar, 2009). One such behavior that may be affected by disabilities is dress behavior. However, most research on this topic addresses nondisabled consumers and ignores those with disabilities (Miller, 1997). Consequently, the experiences of disabled consumers have not contributed equally to our present understanding of behavior related to dress (Lamb, 2001).

A few aspects of disabled consumers’ decision making have been examined. For instance, the shopping and clothing design needs of disabled consumers have been examined (de Klerk & Ampousah, 2002; Kidd, 2006). However, clothing decision making is not just limited to prepurchase selection. Clothing consumption also includes the use of clothing postpurchase (Winakor, 1969). In this sense, clothing selection occurs both while consumers are shopping and on a daily basis. Furthermore, clothing decision making, both pre- and postpurchase, is not merely about fit and design. Individuals assign meanings to clothing that help to facilitate interaction with others (Coskuner & Sandikci, 2004). Thus, clothing selection is an important means by which individuals achieve emotional and psychological satisfaction and express their personal and social identities (Roach-Higgins & Eicher, 1992). Given the importance of dress to express personal and social meanings, investigation of psychological aspects of clothing selection and use among disabled individuals is needed beyond issues of functionality.

The purpose of this exploratory study was to address a gap in the literature by exploring what dress means for consumers with diverse kinds of disabilities and how their clothing selection relates to their health and well-being from a general perspective. A qualitative approach was deemed appropriate, given the need to understand dress behavior from the perspective of disabled consumers. As there is very little research that examines disability and clothing selection (Kidd, 2006; Lamb, 2001), this study explores clothing selection behaviors among individuals with a wide range of both physical and psychological disabilities. Valuable insights about disabled consumers’ behavior, as compared to nondisabled consumers’ behavior, can be gleaned by considering the perspectives of consumers with a variety of disabilities. The following research questions guided the study: What types of clothing do disabled consumers select? What are the reasons for their clothing selection? In what ways is clothing used to express the self and identity by those with disabilities?

Disabled Consumers

Disability is defined as any lack of ability to perform an activity that is considered normal for a human being in a particular society (Ittyerah & Kumar, 2009). Based on the type of disability someone has, whether it is from birth or the result of an accident, individuals with disabilities may appear and behave differently. Therefore, disabilities are often categorized into several different groups.

First, disabilities are categorized based on the type of disability: physical and/or mental (McDevitt, 1998). Physical disabilities include blindness, deafness, and orthopedic disabilities. Mental disabilities include developmental, neurological, and learning disorders (e.g., attention deficit hyperactivity disorder [ADHD], autism, and cerebral palsy). Second, a disability is further categorized based on whether it is congenital or accidental. Congenital disabilities include innate defects that one has had from birth. Accidental disabilities are those a person receives after birth (e.g., amputated limb resulting from military service). A third level of disability categorization relates to the length of time the disability is expected to last: temporary or permanent. Temporary disabilities are those from which an individual can recover (e.g., broken leg), while permanent disabilities include both congenital and accidental handicaps from which an individual cannot recover (e.g., loss of vision; McDevitt, 1998).

While differentiating individuals based upon their specific disabilities is extremely useful for some purposes (e.g., medical treatment) and in some contexts (e.g., educational settings), learning about the similarities experienced by disabled individuals, regardless of disability type or category, is often useful in other contexts (e.g., demographic, psychographic). For instance, in 2004, the National Organization on Disability presented data on the experience of living with disabilities. The data revealed that life satisfaction is lower for disabled than nondisabled individuals, and disabled people are less likely to socialize or attend religious services than those without disabilities. These findings suggest that disabled individuals may tend to be more isolated, lonely, or depressed than nondisabled people (Bender, Rosenkrans, & Crane, 1999).

One consequence of disability that has received attention is the low level of income earned by disabled individuals due to limited job opportunities. Recently, public policy in the United States has focused on enhancing the socioeconomic conditions of those with disabilities. In addition, the government’s commitment to the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990 has helped reduce discrimination and allowed for more opportunities in the workplace. Such efforts help to encourage members of society to view disabled individuals positively and provide these individuals with the chance to succeed.

As disabled individuals engage in work and society more frequently, it is likely that their needs have changed. However, because they have been overlooked in the literature on consumption in general and with respect to clothing in particular, little is known about these needs (Kidd, 2006). This study addresses this gap by exploring dress-related behaviors and meanings among disabled consumers.

Functions of Clothing

Clothing has many functions, including some that are fairly basic. Research suggests that all consumers wear clothing to fulfill their basic needs, such as protecting the body from the physical elements (e.g., cold weather, rain; Barnard, 2002). Yet, not all functions of clothing are so basic. The clothing we choose to wear can be used as a tool to express oneself (Roach & Eicher, 1973). Clothing symbolically communicates the personal, social, and cultural identity of the wearer. Clothing and appearance are visible elements that we use to identify and differentiate ourselves and others (Inglessis, 2008).

The clothing one chooses to purchase and wear is intricately linked to aspects of one’s individual and social identity. Self-concept is one’s self-perception related to attitudes, feelings, and knowledge about one’s appearance or abilities (Byrne, 1984). Self-concept has been shown to influence consumers’ clothing selection and purchase behavior (Cassill & Drake, 1987; Hart & Dewsnap, 2001). In addition, clothing has been shown to be a means of establishing a wearer’s social identity. Individuals belong to certain social groups and seek to socialize with others within these groups. Individuals use the meanings associated with clothing to indicate roles within society to others (Kaiser, Nagasawa, & Hutton, 1991).

While the aforementioned research on the uses and meanings of clothing focused on consumers without regard to their ability status, a small amount of research specifically on disabled consumers has been conducted. For example, Kaiser, Freeman, and Wingate (1985) found that apparel can play a rehabilitative role in that it builds disabled consumers’ life skills and enhances their self-esteem. Lamb (2001) found that disabled consumers use clothing to improve their appearance and create a positive self-presentation. In terms of social identity, Lamb explained how people with disabilities construct and interpret appearances in their everyday lives. Kaiser et al. (1985) found that disabled consumers are not interested in extreme fashion trends and do not want to look different from others. This may be because they know that dress and physical condition have an impact on others’ perceptions of them and their ability to perform certain behaviors (Christman & Branson, 1990; Forsythe, 1990).

Although disabled consumers use clothing in some of the same ways as nondisabled consumers, many important differences may exist. The meaning of clothing is subjective and can be linked to physiological, psychological, and philosophical, as well as social and cultural, aspects (Roach & Eicher, 1973). Because disabled individuals may face additional challenges that nondisabled individuals do not face, it is important to understand what meanings clothing might have specifically for disabled individuals in different contexts. An important theme arising from the previous research on disabled individuals and clothing is the notion that clothing can be used to enhance not only the wearer’s beliefs about his or her own abilities but also others’ beliefs about the wearer’s abilities (Kwon & Shim, 1999). Findings from previous research suggest that disabled consumers’ clothing choices may be, in part, driven by their feeling of self-efficacy.

Self-Efficacy Theory

According to Bandura (1977), self-efficacy is an individual’s beliefs about the possession of capabilities required to accomplish certain goals. The idea for self-efficacy originated from Bandura’s (1986) social cognitive theory (SCT). According to SCT, individuals are thought to be driven to learn by three types of interacting determinants: personal factors, behaviors, and environments (or situations; see Figure 1). Personal factors include an individual’s previous experiences and physiological elements. Behavioral factors include others’ behaviors that can influence the individual’s behavior (e.g., observing a friend passing a test can influence an individual’s belief that he or she can also pass the test). Environmental factors include the situation in which an individual experiences the self.

Figure 1.

Social cognitive theory. Source: Bandura (1977).

Self-efficacy has been applied across fields of study, including social psychology, health, and education (Annesi, 2010; Bandura, 1977; Judge, Locke, Durham, & Kluger, 1998). For example, Annesi (2010) investigated exercise self-efficacy (e.g., perceived ability to do a certain exercise) and found that women with high exercise self-efficacy are more likely to follow an exercise program and lose weight than women with low exercise self-efficacy. Positive psychological states of individuals, such as life satisfaction and job satisfaction, have often been found to be consequences of positive self-efficacy (Oyedele & Simpson, 2007).

Generalized self-efficacy is often viewed as a result of one’s perceptions of his or her fundamental ability to cope with life’s demands. Therefore, generalized self-efficacy is useful for understanding disabled individuals’ perceptions of their capabilities to handle their life situation. Based on perceptions of generalized self-efficacy, disabled individuals will likely evaluate themselves differently and have different self-concepts. For example, those disabled individuals who believe in their ability to deal with any given situation will be more likely to have positive self-concepts than those who do not. Although the impact of self-efficacy on disabled consumers’ pre- and postpurchase clothing selection and use has not been previously explored, it seems likely that self-efficacy will emerge as an important factor for understanding the clothing selection and use among individuals with disabilities. Because the research on disabled consumers’ use of dress and clothing selection is minimal, the current study will help to fill this existing gap in the literature (Lamb, 2001; Miller, 1997).

Method

The purpose of this study is to understand what clothing means to disabled consumers, regardless of disability type; therefore, a qualitative research design was used. Qualitative inquiry allows for developing a deeper understanding of a phenomenon and is particularly useful when little is known about it (Hodges, 2011). In the case of this study, in-depth interviews were the primary qualitative method employed in order to explore how individuals with disabilities experience their daily lives and to better understand these experiences relative to their clothing selection behaviors (van Manen, 1990).

A total of nine female consumers with disabilities participated in the study (see Table 1). Female consumers were purposively sampled because females have been shown to be more involved than men with clothing as a product category (Browne & Kaldenberg, 1997). Thus, it was expected that female participants would be interested in discussing their clothing selection and use in this exploratory study. Participants were recruited with the assistance of the campus offices of disabled student services at two universities in a midsized Southeastern city. College students were deemed appropriate for this study because they represent a fairly homogenous sample that is useful for theory building (Greenberg, 1987). Participants’ ages ranged from 18 to 38 and represented a range of academic majors. Disability types included visual impairments, physical disabilities, learning disabilities, mood disorders, and high-functioning autism. Although the disabilities of participants are noted for informational purposes, the purpose of the interviews was not to compare individuals with disabilities. Rather, the purpose of this exploratory study was to understand the dress behavior of disabled consumers in a general sense.

Table 1.

Sample Demographics.

Name	Age	Gender	Major	Disability
Ann	22	Female	Spanish education	Visual impaired
Laura	21	Female	Therapeutic recreation	Physical disability
Barbara	18	Female	Biology	Learning disability (ADHD)
Carole	22	Female	Social work	Physical disability (muscle weakness and spinal deformity)
Susan	25	Female	Gerontology	Asperger’s syndrome (high-functioning autism)
Amy	27	Female	Accounting	Bipolar, anxiety, ADHD, and PTSD
Melanie	22	Female	Interior design	Physical disability (drop foot due to a traumatic brain injury)
Tricia	19	Female	Elementary education	Learning disability, cancer survivor
Natalie	38	Female	Human development and family sciences	Learning disability

Note. Adapted from Ha-Brookshire and Hodges (2009).

ADHD = attention deficit hyperactivity disorder; PTSD = posttraumatic stress disorder.

Pseudonyms were used throughout the article.

Institutional Review Board approval was received by the researchers’ university prior to the interviews. Each interview was recorded with participants’ consent and lasted between 1 and 2 hr. The interviews followed a semistructured format. Questions asked of all participants included, but were not limited to: What do you take into consideration when you select your clothing for the day? What do you look for when buying clothing? What is your favorite outfit and why is it your favorite? What is your most meaningful item of clothing and why is it meaningful? Interviews were conducted until saturation was reached and no new information surfaced (Hodges, 2011; Thompson, 1997).

Interviews were transcribed verbatim. Pseudonyms were assigned to participants to ensure confidentiality. Transcriptions formed the basis of a thematic analysis of the interview data, where categories of experience shared by participants were examined and elaborated upon (Spiggle, 1994). In keeping with accepted protocol for qualitative data analysis (Thompson, 1997), the process began with the authors examining each individual transcript and then identifying commonalities and differences across the transcripts. This process was repeated several times by the authors until distinctive themes emerged (Spiggle, 1994). These themes were then grouped into relevant categories and compared between authors (Denzin, 1978; Heath, 1992). Inconsistencies found across the themes were discussed by the authors until agreement was reached (Johnson, Schofield, & Yurchisin, 2002). The themes were then used to structure the overall interpretation.

Interpretation

Five themes emerged from the responses based on the phenomenological interpretation of interview data (van Manen, 1990). Themes point to reasons behind pre- and postpurchase clothing selection and use of clothing to express identity. The themes include form & function, self-expression, social identity, self-efficacy, and symbols of victory. The first three themes—form & function, self-expression, and social identity—have been identified in previous studies regarding the meaning of dress among nondisabled consumers (Kwon & Parham, 1994). However, self-efficacy and symbols of victory have not been discussed in existing research yet emerged as critical to the participants’ experiences.

The Selection and Use of Clothing Based on Form and Function

Form and function represent the functional reasons behind clothing choice for individuals with disabilities. Participants were asked to talk about what they considered when selecting clothing, and most responded that weather and comfort were important. When asked what is taken into consideration when selecting an outfit for the day, most participants focused on basic functional needs of dress, but often included other related kinds of considerations. For example, Ann, who is 22 years old and visually impaired, explains:

I always look at the weather before I get dressed in the morning. I usually wear jeans and like a nice shirt and a sweater. I always wear sweaters because the classrooms can be hot or cold. I usually put my sweaters in my bag because I walk to the campus. And then I put my coat on over my shirt. So I don’t sweat through everything. And when I get there, I can just put my sweater on when it’s getting chilly.

Ann decides what to wear based on the weather for the day and the temperature variations that she will encounter. At the time of the interview, Ann was doing an internship at an elementary school, so she needed to wear more formal, professional clothing than what she wears on campus.

Barbara, who is 18 years old and has ADHD, responded with a similar emphasis on weather and the need to be comfortable whatever the temperature. She stated, “I think it ties between weather and comfort because when … if the weather is cold, you want to be comfortable in the cold, so [you] wear warmer clothes.”

In the literature it is common to see such functional aspects of dress highlighted. For example, Barnard (2002) found weather and comfort to be important factors for most consumers in general when deciding what to wear. In this sense, the disabled individuals in this study do not differ from the nondisabled individuals in previous research.

Some researchers suggest that basic functional clothing needs may be even more important for disabled consumers when compared to nondisabled consumers (Kidd, 2006). That is, individuals with disabilities may need additional functional modifications of clothing depending on their types of disabilities. Carole, who is 22 years old and has a spinal cord disability, explained that she often has a hard time finding comfortable clothing when she is shopping:

I have a spinal problem, like a back curved spine. So I try not to wear tight clothing because it emphasizes it. But also certain clothes … I try to find things that fit right but not too tight. Especially women’s clothing is really tight … and I am short so I wear the junior clothes and those are very tight.

Carole’s answer points to the specific clothing needs of individuals with physical disabilities and their difficulties in finding clothing that fits them properly in retail stores. Because Carole’s body is differently shaped, she seeks out clothing styles that do not emphasize this difference.

The Selection and Use of Clothing for Self-Expression

Alongside practical considerations of form and function, participants also sought to express themselves by what they wear. Participants were asked if they used clothing as a tool for self-expression and if so, in what ways. In particular, they indicated that they used clothing to express aspects of their personalities. For example, Laura expresses her emotional state through her clothing:

When I am not having a great day, I just wear a comfortable t-shirt and jeans, but when I am, like, way happy, I am going to wear, like…I am very girly, so I wear my most frou-frou outfit dress and it only makes me feel happy that I look good that day.

Similarly, Susan, a 25-year-old with Asperger’s syndrome, sees clothing as an important means of expression:

I think it’s a part of showing my personality, which is integral. And I get to know people and I am pretty goofy. But when I don’t know them so well, I am kind of quiet and try to figure the people out. So my clothes are not high color. So it’s supposed to be good on me but not flashy. Show who I am and what I believe.

Susan believes that by wearing toned down colors she is expressing her moderately conservative personality. Susan does not want to stand out from the crowd and be seen in bright, “flashy” clothing, especially around people she does not know very well.

Ann also uses clothing to express her personality. In this way, she is not different from a nondisabled consumer. When asked about her favorite article of clothing, she stated that she prefers staid clothing because it demonstrates to others that she is a mature college student:

My favorite clothing is my button-up shirt. I like it because it’s definitely an indication of my personality and my…where I am now in my life. And it’s a more serious shirt and more conservative shirt and it’s white. I am really easy going, too. I guess it’s more an indication of where I am being more serious in my life.

The Selection and Use of Clothing for Expression of Social Identity

Alongside personal identity, participants also used clothing to express social identity. Social roles and contexts play an important part in their clothing selection. For example, Ann wears her favorite shirt differently depending on the situation. When she needs to go to class, she wears casual pants with the shirt. However, she selects more formal or dressy skirts or pants to wear with it for her internship:

I probably wear it, like, every other week to my internship or class. Because, I don’t know, people in my class wear professional clothes. And it’s easy to wear it with jeans. And then if I need to wear it to, like, my internship where I can’t wear jeans, then I can put it with a pair of my black dress pants or I can tuck it into my pencil skirts and wear the vest over it. Actually, I like to wear a lot of vests, too. Um, I used to wear my vests with my t-shirts. But now I am a teacher so I have to wear formal shirts.

In this quote, Ann mentions that she selects her clothing based on the context and what the environment calls for. Her two roles—college student versus student teacher—require different appearances, so she alters her clothing based on the role she is playing at the moment. The idea that clothing indicates to others what role the wearer is playing is consistent with what is known about nondisabled individuals from previous research (Kaiser et al., 1991).

Similar to Ann’s response, Melanie, a 22-year-old with a physical disability due to a traumatic brain injury, discussed her use of dress to manage others’ impressions of her:

From my English Composition class my teacher introduced us to rhetoric and how we utilize rhetoric in our everyday lives. So she gave us an example of how the difference between how we would dress ourselves for an interview in comparison to how we would dress ourselves for a party. So obviously you would wear formal clothes for an interview and maybe a cute dress for a party. I think overall, considering our audience, or in other words caring for how others see me and think of me, is somewhat necessary, but I think too much obsession of how others think of me is unhealthy.

Melanie’s description demonstrates her knowledge of how dress can mark her status in society. When she wants to appear as a professional person who is capable of performing a job, she would wear “formal clothes” to a job interview. When she wants to look like she is a person who is young, fun, and ready to socialize with others, she thinks it is appropriate to wear a “cute dress.”

It is interesting to note that Melanie makes a distinction between healthy and unhealthy use of clothing styles to project an appropriate appearance to others. To Melanie, it is important to dress for the audience, but there is a point at which concern about one’s appearance becomes psychologically harmful. To maintain her psychological health, Melanie believes she should limit the extent to which she worries about others’ impressions of her based solely on her appearance.

Like Melanie, Susan also stated that she purposely uses her appearance to appear to others that she possesses particular characteristics and social group membership. She expressed her concern with the way in which others saw her:

I do really care how other people look at me. Especially like at work and at church. I grew up at church. Even at my church, it’s a little more chilled out and people wear jeans, but still I try myself to dress up. That’s more like tradition.

In line with Lamb’s (2001) research on disabled individuals, Susan uses clothing to improve her appearance and self-presentation. Even though others may not dress up for church, she still feels that it is necessary to honor tradition and wear formal clothes, as opposed to casual clothes, to church. Religion is important to Susan, so she dresses up to show respect for it and others who share her beliefs.

Although the first three themes (i.e., form and function, self-expression, and social identity) have been identified as important to clothing selection and meaning in previous studies with nondisabled consumers (Kwon & Parham, 1994), the next two themes (self-efficacy and symbols of victory) emerged as important to understanding the role of participants’ disabilities relative to their clothing behaviors.

The Selection and Use of Clothing Based on Perceptions of Self-Efficacy

The theme of self-efficacy emerged from disabled participants’ discussion of dress. In the following quote, Tricia, a 19-year-old cancer survivor, mentions that her positive experiences and life stages are related to and reflected in her clothing choices:

I love colors so much…this outfit’s got patches all over it. And um…this kind of clothing is like how my life has been. My life has been very different than regular adolescents. So I am not afraid to have things, wear things that stand out. I had cancer when I was young, so I had shaved hair for such a long time that I just, you know, just stood out. So I am not afraid to, like, to show that anymore.

Tricia associates meanings in her clothing with perceptions of her abilities during difficult life stages. She strongly expressed that she is not afraid of any difficult situation. She will find a way to overcome any challenge. To express this aspect of her personality, she does not want to wear what other people wear, even people with whom she shares common interests. Interestingly, this is somewhat different from Kaiser, Nagasawa, and Hutton’s (1991) conclusion that disabled individuals do not want to stand out by their dress.

Laura also enjoys drawing attention to herself based on her clothing choices. A therapeutic recreation major, she explained that she does not want to wear the polo shirts that so many in her peer group wear:

I am finding out more and more that the majority of the people in the field that I am going into wear polo shirts. I don’t think that I can to do it. It’s just like completely opposite what I usually wear. And all of my friends are like “maybe you can be the Rachel Zoe of therapeutic recreation.” It’s like, not like I actively strive to be different, but at the same time, like I don’t want to, I guess I don’t want to fit into that mold of polo shirts.

On the other hand, participants’ clothing selection can be determined by their lack of perceived self-capabilities. Like Laura, Barbara’s clothing selection appears to be related to her ability to perform certain tasks. However, in contrast to Laura’s positive response, Barbara showed less self-confidence in terms of her ability to cope with the obstacles her disability presents. Barbara seems to wear dark clothes to hide her vibrant characteristics as perceptions of self-efficacy seem to limit her clothing choice:

Maybe that’s the darker color which hides the vibrant and expressive, um…impulsive person. My ADHD still makes me. Because…I mean as much as I try to control, there is just a level that I can’t control. And playing with the dark clothes, it’s who I want to be and it’s who I am in the inside. But dark clothes also could be bright and loud. They are also very expressive of who I am even with my disabilities. It’s not much of a disability because I can, do handle it really well. But ADHD does hinder me, [with] some relationships and clothes. I try to cage that in with what I wear.

Similar to Barbara, Susan talked about how she experienced shyness and a lack of confidence before she started college. She described how perceptions of self-efficacy improved over time and were reflected in her dress behaviors:

I don’t feel like I really became comfortable with who I am until my undergraduate [studies]. I was home schooled from pre-school to high school graduation, all the way up. I have just always been shy and influenced by other people. I had been in the corner and waiting for people [to approach me]. So I did not want to wear something that stood out.

When Susan was younger, she lacked confidence. As her confidence and feelings of self-efficacy grew in college, she became less afraid of showing her personality through her dress and trying out new styles of dress:

But now I am like, forget that. I want to wear comfortable stuff, but I also want to show off who I am. I was like a tomboy and my weight…I’ve got 40 pounds, which I haven’t lost yet. I was very tomboy. And I want to wear skirts. I wear jeans. I wear everything. Just whatever shows feelings. I usually put them on. Now, I want to show who I am.

The Selection and Use of Clothing as Symbols of Victory

After having overcome obstacles, disabled participants in this study talked about using clothing to mark this triumph. In this way, they seemed to be using clothing as a symbol of victory. This theme is distinct from that of self-efficacy because it refers to the positive outcome of participants’ disability-related challenges. In contrast, self-efficacy reflects one’s ongoing perceptions of her capabilities throughout life. For example, because Tricia, a 19-year-old with a learning disability, overcame cancer, she likes to express this triumph through her clothing. She stated, “I fought and have survived cancer. I can do anything. So I am going to wear anything. And I don’t care about what you say. I want to dress up because I fought with cancer and overcame.”

As Tricia described, it is not about showing off or comparing herself with others. Instead, she uses clothing as a voice to tell others of her victory over health-related adversity in her life. She said she likes colorful outfits that can show her life struggle and her victory.

Another participant, Susan, linked meanings in her clothing with her accomplishments while in college. Even though she experienced difficulties with peer groups before, she became more outgoing and gained self-confidence while studying in college and earning her degree. She is working as a graduate assistant and is passionate about what she is studying. Thus, her clothing choices reflect her life changes and accomplishments. Now she knows how to express her difference in a positive way. Again, it is interesting that this notion is distinct from Kaiser et al.’s (1991) suggestion that disabled individuals do not try to be different via dress. Susan’s behavior demonstrates her use of clothing to express meanings and accomplishments related to her disabilities:

I feel like I stand out a lot anyways. I have malfunction autism, and so I got diagnosed with that when I was twenty one. I was home schooled which is a good thing I think. And [then] I came to the university. And so I feel like I am different anyways, which I am starting to welcome instead of hating myself. I used to be a people pleaser. I liked to be with people who were older than me. So I dressed like who I admired and who I met, too. But now I am changing. I am a lot more comfortable to make friends [who are] my age. And now I know…difference is good thing. That’s how I am.

Being diagnosed and learning to live with her disability marked a triumph for Susan. Likewise, for Amy, a 27-year-old suffering from a variety of psychological disabilities including anxiety and posttraumatic stress disorder, continuing to function normally while living with her disability is the obstacle she wants to highlight with her dress. Amy’s accomplishments are represented in her favorite boots. The social group she is involved in gives their members certain leather products as a reward for overcoming obstacles. Amy earned a pair of leather boots from her social group and wears them most of the time to show the pride she associated with her accomplishment:

These are earned boots. It’s the first item that I earned for several years that mean I am doing things with the local community. So they mean a lot to me. And these represent the journey that I have been on and the journey that I can continue to walk. Yes. So I pretty much wear them every day. I’ve had these a little bit over a year. I polish them every week.

Discussion and Implications

Results of the interviews provide insight into participants’ dress behaviors and meanings. The interview data produced five themes (see Figure 2). Three of these themes, form and function, self-expression, and social identity, were found to be basic themes of clothing selection and use in general. These three themes were present in past research with both disabled and nondisabled consumers, suggesting that disabled consumers may be similar to nondisabled consumers with respect to these points (Kwon & Parham, 1994).

Figure 2.

The paradigm of clothing meanings for disabled consumers.

As Barnard (2002) suggested, functional aspects of clothing were addressed among interview participants. Thus, comfort and functionality represented important aspects of dress considered by individuals with disabilities in this study. Moreover, as Arnold and Chapman (1992) found, self-expression, including consumers’ own characteristics or moods, was another reason why participants selected particular clothing. Additionally, social status or occupations of the participants seemed to be embedded in what they wear. In this way as well, these disabled consumers seem to use clothing in a manner similar to that of nondisabled consumers (Kaiser et al., 1991).

This study uncovered two additional yet previously unidentified and distinct types of clothing selection and use: self-efficacy and symbols of victory. In this study, both individuals’ perceptions of their capabilities, self-efficacy, and the positive consequences of certain activities, symbols of victory, are embedded as meanings in clothing for disabled consumers. These findings suggest that clothing may play a unique, and perhaps more significant, role for these disabled consumers compared to nondisabled consumers in general. That is, these disabled consumers may look to clothing to enhance their ability to manage their disabilities and, in turn, improve their sense of well-being and mental health. For these disabled consumers, self-efficacy seemed to have a substantial impact on their clothing choices.

Furthermore, the findings of this study support the idea that disabled consumers’ perceptions of self are related to their clothing choices (Lamb, 2001). In particular, participants’ self-efficacy, or the ability to handle difficult life circumstances (especially those that are health related) was related to their choice of clothing color and style. Because of its impact on their dress behavior, additional research is needed to fully explore the relationship between self-efficacy and dress behavior among disabled individuals. Dress can clearly help to encourage feelings of self-efficacy through self-esteem as well as by symbolizing positive life experiences and accomplishments. As the experiences of participants in this study reveal, such symbols can include conquering threats to one’s health and well-being by such debilitating diseases as cancer, posttraumatic stress disorder, or anxiety.

Although beyond the scope of the present study, the duration of a disability (e.g., lifelong vs. less than 1 year) may reveal significant relationships with respect to self-efficacy and clothing selection and use among individuals with disabilities. Whether a disability occurs early in life or is acquired recently may affect self-efficacy and, consequently, self-esteem. Although not previously investigated, a similar relationship between self-efficacy and clothing selection and use could also exist for nondisabled individuals. Furthermore, among nondisabled individuals, researchers have found that a relationship exists between self-efficacy and self-esteem (Bandura, 1997; Judge et al., 1998). A parallel pattern may exist for disabled individuals, and these relationships may be reflected in the clothing selection choices of both disabled and nondisabled individuals. These relationships can be studied in future research.

Future research is needed regarding how society looks at disabled people and how disabled people establish their social self-concept. The participants in this study cared about how others saw them based on their dress. How dress is used by disabled individuals in various life spaces, such as with family, with friends, with coworkers, and with supervisors needs more investigation. Cultural or social perspectives are additional dimensions that may be used to better understand disabled consumers’ social concept. In a collectivist culture, disabled consumers may care more about others’ opinions as opposed to a culture that stresses individualism (Hofstede, 2001).

How disabled consumers interact with others in their daily lives is becoming important. Social perceptions of disabled individuals have become more positive (Burnett, 2006). People with disabilities are no longer only viewed as “charity cases” or “regulatory burdens” but as profitable marketing targets (Prager, 1999). Although the inability to find well-fitting clothing to purchase was mentioned by some disabled consumers in this study, many mainstream companies (e.g., Target and Nike) have modified products to attract disabled consumers (Prager, 1999). Based on this new perspective about disabled consumers, comparisons between disabled and nondisabled consumers’ perceptions of and reactions to these adapted products and marketing strategies to promote such products can be made in future research.

Another potentially fruitful future research avenue also relates to disabled consumers’ shopping behaviors (MacDonald, Majumder, & Bua-Iam, 1994). Advanced technology has provided consumers with a variety of options to use when clothing–shopping and has good potential for making clothing–shopping more convenient for disabled consumers. Due to physical or mental constraints, disabled people need more convenient ways to shop for clothing. Thus, a potential research avenue to explore is that of disabled consumers’ use of technology-based shopping environments. As found in previous research, disabled consumers sometimes have difficulties with online searches (Childers & Kaufman-Scarborough, 2009). Because learning to shop effectively online for clothing could be considered a triumph for disabled consumers, the activity could be used to enhance their self-efficacy and may, consequently, be reflected in their clothing use. Thus, further research concerning disability and shopping methods is needed.

Finally, because this study was exploratory in nature, the sample consisted of a small number of participants who reflected a wide range of ages as well as both physical and psychological disabilities. Because the aim of the study was to explore clothing behavior among individuals with disabilities from a general perspective, future research is needed that specifies types of clothing behaviors relative to different kinds of disabilities and consideration of how these behaviors might relate to age. In addition to allowing for more generalization of findings, such research would help broaden our understanding of the clothing needs of consumers with certain types of disabilities, such as individuals with visual impairments, which may differ from those of individuals with learning disabilities.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Annesi

J. J.

(2010). Relations of changes in self-regulatory efficacy and physical self-concept with improvements in body satisfaction in obese women initiating exercise with cognitive-behavioral support. Body Image, 7, 356–359.

Arnold

Chapman

(1992). Self-esteem, aspirations and expectations of adolescents with physical disability. Developmental Medicine and Child Neurology, 34, 97–102.

Bandura

(1977). Self-efficacy: Toward a unifying theory of behavioral change. Psychological Review, 84, 191–215.

Bandura

(1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

Barnard

(2002). Fashion as communication. Oxford, England: Routledge Taylor and Francis.

Bender

W. B.

Rosenkrans

C. B.

Crane

M.-K.

(1999). Stress, depression, and suicide among students with learning disabilities: Assessing the risk. Learning Disability Quarterly, 22, 143–156.

Browne

B. A.

Kaldenberg

D. O.

(1997). Conceptualizing self-monitoring: Links to materialism and product involvement. The Journal of Consumer Marketing, 14, 31–44.

Burnett

(2006). Disabled consumers: The use of the internet and attitudes toward web advertising. Journal of Advertising Research, 46, 324–338.

Byrne

B. M.

(1984). The general/academic nomological network: A review of construct validation research. Review of Educational Research, 54, 427–456.

10.

Cassill

N. L.

Drake

M. F.

(1987). Apparel selection criteria related to female consumers’ lifestyle. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 6, 120–128.

11.

Childers

T. L.

Kaufman-Scarborough

(2009). Expanding opportunities for online shoppers with disabilities. Journal of Business Research, 62, 572–578.

12.

Christman

L. A.

Branson

D. H.

(1990). Influence of physical disability and dress of female job applicants on interviewers. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 8, 51–57.

13.

Coskuner

Sandikci

(2004). New clothing: Meaning and practices. Advances in Consumer Research, 31, 285–290.

14.

de Klerk

H. M.

Ampousah

(2002). The physically disabled South African female consumer’s problems in purchasing clothing. International Journal of Consumer Studies, 26, 93–101.

15.

Denzin

N. K.

(1978). The research act: A theoretical introduction to sociological methods (2nd ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.

16.

Forsythe

S. M.

(1990). Effect of applicant’s clothing on an interviewer’s decision to hire. Journal of Applied Social Psychology, 20, 1579–1595.

17.

Greenberg

(1987). The college sophomore as guinea pig: Setting the record straight. The Academy of Management Review, 12, 157–159.

18.

Ha-Brookshire

Hodges

(2009). Socially responsible consumer behavior?: Exploring used clothing donation behavior. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 27, 179–196.

19.

Hart

Dewsnap

(2001). An exploratory study of the consumer decision process for intimate apparel. Journal of Fashion Marketing and Management, 5, 108–119.

20.

Heath

T. B.

(1992). The reconciliation of humanism and positivism in the practice of consumer research: A view from the trenches. Journal of the Academy of Marketing Science, 20, 107–118.

21.

Hodges

(2011). Qualitative research: A discussion of frequently articulated qualms (FAQS). Family and Consumer Sciences Research Journal, 40, 90–92.

22.

Hofstede

(2001). Culture’s consequences: Comparing values, behaviors, institutions, and organizations across nations (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

23.

Inglessis

M. G

. (2008). Communicating through clothing: The meaning of clothing among Hispanic women of different levels of acculturation (Doctoral dissertation). Florida State University. Retrieved from http://etd.lib.fsu.edu/theses/available/etd-05072008-002535/unrestricted/InglessisMDissertation.pdf

24.

Ittyerah

Kumar

(2009). The actual and ideal self-concept in disabled children, adolescents and adults. Psychology and Developing Societies, 19, 81–112.

25.

Johnson

K. K. P.

Schofield

N. A.

Yurchisin

(2002). Appearance and dress as a source of information: A qualitative approach to data collection. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 20, 125–137.

26.

Judge

T. A.

Locke

E. A.

Durham

C. C.

Kluger

A. N.

(1998). Dispositional effects on job and life satisfaction: The role of core evaluations. Journal of Applied Psychology, 83, 17–34.

27.

Kaiser

S. B.

Freeman

C. M.

Wingate

S. B.

(1985). Stigmata and negotiated outcomes: Management of appearance by persons with physical disabilities. Deviant Behavior, 6, 205–224.

28.

Kaiser

S. B.

Nagasawa

R. H.

Hutton

S. S.

(1991). Fashion, postmodernity, and personal appearance: A symbolic interactionist formulation. Symbolic Interaction, 14, 165–185.

29.

Kidd

L. K.

(2006). A case study: Creating special occasion garments for young women with special needs. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 24, 161–172.

30.

Kwon

Y.-H.

Parham

E. S.

(1994). Effects of state of fatness perception on weight conscious women’s clothing practices. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 12, 16–21.

31.

Kwon

Y.-H.

Shim

(1999). A structural model for weight satisfaction, self-consciousness and women’s use of clothing in mood enhancement. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 17, 203–212.

32.

Lamb

J. M.

(2001). Disability and the social importance of appearance. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 19, 134–143.

33.

MacDonald

N. M.

Majumder

R. K.

Bua-Iam

(1994). Apparel acquisition for consumers with disabilities: Purchasing practices and barriers to shopping, Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 12, 38–45.

34.

McDevitt

T. M.

(1998). World population profile: U.S. bureau of the census, Report WP.98. Washington, DC: U.S. Bureau of the Census.

35.

Miller

K. A.

(1997). Dress: Private and secret self-expression. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 15, 223–234.

36.

National Organization on Disabilities. (2004). Harris survey of Americans with disabilities. Washington, DC: Author.

37.

Oyedele

Simpson

P. M.

(2007). An empirical investigation of consumer control factors on intention to use selected self-service technologies. International Journal of Service Industry Management, 18, 287–306.

38.

Prager

. (1999, December 15). People with disabilities are the next consumer niche. The Wall Street Journal, B1–B2.

39.

Roach

M. E.

Eicher

J. B.

(1973). The visible self: Perspectives on dress. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.

40.

Roach-Higgins

M. E.

Eicher

J. B.

(1992). Dress and identity. Clothing and Textiles Research Journal, 10, 1–8.

41.

Spiggle

(1994). Analysis and interpretation of qualitative data in consumer research. Journal of Consumer Research, 21, 491–503.

42.

Thompson

C. J.

(1997). Interpreting consumers: A hermeneutical framework for deriving marketing insights from the texts of consumers’ consumption stories. Journal of Marketing Research, 34, 438–455.

43.

U.S. Census Bureau. (2009). Supporting the 2010 census: Toolkit for reaching people with disabilities. Washington, DC: Author.

44.

van Manen

(1990). Research lived experience: Human science for an action sensitive pedagogy. New York: State University of New York.

45.

Winakor

(1969). The process of clothing consumption. Journal of Home Economics, 61, 629–634.