misLeading pant sizes-why women aren’t as thin as they think
Posted on | April 11, 2012 | 3 Comments
The Economist magazine is taking a jab at another sort of inflation. Women’s pant sizes, while nominally the same, have actually been increasing in girth. The British new magazine estimates that an average size 14 pair of women’s pants “is now more than four inches wider at the waist than it was in the 1970s.”
Some fashion industry bloggers explain this away with such nonsense as “sizes evolve, just like people do,” or “we have to change our sizes based on average [people] sizes.” In other words, people are getting fatter, so the clothing sizes have to get fatter with them.
If a measurement instrument changes when the thing it measures changes, the resulting “measurement” is not a measurement at all.
Photo: ©iStockphoto.com/gregory horler
© 2012 Greenbridge Management Inc.
Comments
3 Responses to “misLeading pant sizes-why women aren’t as thin as they think”
Leave a Reply
Buy Your Copy
On sale Feb 29, 2012
Price $48
(In stock now). (In stock now)Order ebooks 1-800-368-6868 (7am to 430pm PST, Mon-Fri) or 805-968-1911 ext 312
Buy Amazon US
In stock.
Buy Amazon Canada
In stock
Read the first two chapters: Click here.
Tag Cloud
advsertising background information baseball bonds census coin flip compliance cooking data customer complaints debt definitions doping earnings economic activity election errors experimentation fashion industry fraud gambler's fallacy GDP government statistics investment jobs key performance indicator Kord Kelvin Lance Armstrong management media p-value privacy probability productivity profit quality of life radar risk safety science six sigma stock market unmeasurable US Election wealth website trafficArchives
- April 2013 (1)
- March 2013 (1)
- February 2013 (2)
- January 2013 (2)
- December 2012 (2)
- November 2012 (1)
- October 2012 (2)
- September 2012 (2)
- August 2012 (3)
- July 2012 (2)
- June 2012 (2)
- May 2012 (2)
- April 2012 (2)
- March 2012 (1)
- February 2012 (2)
- January 2012 (2)
- December 2011 (3)
- November 2011 (2)
- October 2011 (2)
- September 2011 (3)
- August 2011 (1)
- July 2011 (1)
- June 2011 (2)
- May 2011 (2)
- April 2011 (2)
- March 2011 (3)
- February 2011 (2)
- January 2011 (3)
- December 2010 (2)
- November 2010 (3)
- October 2010 (3)
- September 2010 (4)
- August 2010 (9)
- July 2010 (3)
April 11th, 2012 @ 9:50 am
Some? I’d say “one”.
“Fashion” blogger? I’m an engineer, I majored in economics.
Iow, you did a cursory search, found what conformed to your preconceived ideas rather than read the lengthy counter arguments and arrived at your cursory conclusions. Precisely the course you advocate that others discard.
April 12th, 2012 @ 8:49 am
I provided links to two people blogging about fashion size inflation, not one. I read the lengthy counter arguments and disagreed with them in my post for the reasons I provided.
May 24th, 2012 @ 6:20 pm
For a more academic analysis of this see Boguslewska-Baczek (2010) Analysis of the contemporary problem of garment sizes, proceedings 7th International conference – TEXSCI 2010.
For what it’s worth, lots of anecdotal evidence of this is around too!
Cheers,
Andy