Men’s Bodies and Clothing Consumption: A Systematic Literature Review and Meta-analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Regardless of their gender identity, men with smaller or bigger bodies have challenges accessing stylish-well-fitting garments. That negatively influences their clothing shopping experience and is the reason why some brands and researchers focus on this issue through their design and marketing activities and research. However, the research findings on men's bodies and clothing consumption are scattered, and no comprehensive review has been conducted on the topic. Therefore, this study aims to systematically review literature about a man’s body shape and its impact on their clothing consumption behaviour to provide a holistic point of view. This study conducted a systematic literature review in which 10-peer-reviewed articles between 2000- 2021 were examined through the PRISMA framework, which included a meta-analysis. The study demonstrates that males’ body sizes influence their garment fit preferences and fit issues depending on types of clothing. This research contributes to both the fashion industry and academia by providing a unifying perspective on the topic of men’s bodies and clothing consumption, a reference for future scholarly studies, and practical suggestions for tackling this issue.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.007 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".