Abstract
<p>Clothing size labels are a salient interface between consumers and apparel products and have been suggested to influence body image and emotional responses. This study experimentally examined whether different clothing size labeling systems—category-based versus color-based—affect women’s state body image and mood when isolated from garment fit and shopping context. Sixty-seven women participated in a laboratory-based apparel simulation in which standardized body measurements were taken, and individualized size feedback was provided. Participants were randomly assigned to receive size feedback in a category-based (S/M/L/XL) or color-based format via a computerized interface. State body dissatisfaction, feelings of fatness, weight concern, and mood were assessed at baseline, post-measurement, and post-feedback. Participants’ attitudes toward size labeling systems and retail sizing practices were also assessed. Results showed no consistent effects of labeling condition or measurement procedure on any outcome. Across all domains, state responses were strongly predicted by state baseline body-related indices, whereas experimental condition and objective body size did not account for change over time. Secondary analyses indicated widespread dissatisfaction with existing sizing practices, independent of experimental conditions. These findings indicate that, under the specific conditions tested, no evidence was found that labeling format influenced body-related states; rather, they reflect pre-existing self-perceptions when detached from embodied and contextual cues. The results identify boundary conditions for the psychological impact of size labeling and highlight the importance of individual differences in apparel-related body image.</p>