ArticlePDF Available

Abstract

This study investigated dress used to communicate private and secret aspects of the self according to Eicher's framework (1981, 1982). Eicher stated that individuals dress for fun while expressing the private self and for fantasy while expressing the secret self. A "Dressing for Fun and Fantasy" questionnaire was developed to determine if individuals who regularly dress in costume use dress to communicate the private and/or secret self and if this use varies by sex, age or income. Two hundred and eighteen individuals who dress in costume were surveyed; 190 surveys were used for data analysis. Data were analyzed using principal components factor analysis, MANOVA and stepdown univariate analysis of variance. Of the eleven dependent variables tested, two were significant: sexual fantasies and childhood memories of dress. Findings indicate women have more sexual fantasies about dress and more childhood memories of dress than men. Recommendations are made to expand Eicher's framework by adding public and private self components to dressing for fantasy.
223
Dress:
Private
and
Secret
Self-Expression
Kimberly
A.
Miller
Miller,
K.
A.
(1997).
Dress:
Private
and
secret
self-expression.
Clothing
and
Textiles
Research
Journal,
15
(4),
223-234.
Key
Words:
dress,
self,
fantasy,
costume.
Author’s
Address:
318
Erikson
Hall,
University
of
Kentucky,
Lex-
ington,
KY
40506-0050.
Acknowledgments:
The
author
wishes
to
express
appreciation
to
Emmanuel
Okorley
for
his
statistical
expertise
and
to
the
anonymous
reviewers
for
helpful
suggestions.
Abstract
This
study
investigated
dress
used
to
communicate
private
and
secret
aspects
of
the
self according
to
Eicher’s
framework
(1981,
1982).
Eicher
stated
that
individuals
dress
for
fun
while
expressing
the
private
self
and
for
fantasy
while
expressing
the
secret
self.
A
"Dressing
for
Fun
and
Fantasy"
questionnaire
was
developed
to
determine
if individuals
who
regularly
dress
in
costume
use
dress
to
communicate
the
private
and/or
secret
self and
if this
use
varies
by
sex,
age
or
income.
Two
hundred
and
eighteen
individuals
who
dress
in
costume
were
surveyed;
190
surveys
were
used
for
data
analysis.
Data
were
analyzed
using
principal
components
factor
analysis,
MANOVA
and
stepdown
univariate
analysis
of
variance.
Of
the
eleven
dependent
variables
tested,
two
were
significant:
sexual
fantasies
and
childhood
memories
of
dress.
Findings
indicate
women
have
more
sexual
fantasies
about
dress
and
more
childhood
memories
of
dress
than
men.
Recommendations
are
made
to
expand
Eicher’s
framework
by
adding
public
and
private
self
components
to
dressing
for
fantasy.
Eicher
(1981)
stated
dress’
communicates
private
and
secret
aspects
of
the
self.
Theorists,
particularly
those
interested
in
symbolic
interaction,
maintain
that
the
self
is
communicated
through
the
use
of
symbols
(Blumer,
1969;
Goffman,
1959; Langer,
1942;
Mead,
1934; Wilson,
1985).
Stone
(1965)
added
dress
and
socialization
to
symbolic
interaction
theories.
Eicher
(1981,1982),
building
on
Stone’s
s
work,
developed
a
framework
to
address
the
self
and
how
it
is
communicated
through
dress.
Her
framework
differenti-
ates
three
aspects
of
the
self
-
public,
private
and
secret.
These
are
communicated
when
an
individual
dresses
for
reality,
fun
and
fantasy.
According
to
Eicher
(1981),
the
self
is
communicated
in
three
ways;
the
self
we
let
everyone
know
(public),
the
self
we
let
close
friends
and
family
know
(private),
and
the
self
we
may
not
let
anyone
or
only
intimates
know
(secret).
She
proposed
dressing
the
public
self
is
a
presentation
of
one’s
occupation,
age
and
sex
portrayed
through
the
use
of
reality
dress.
Dressing
the
private
self
indicates
relaxation
and
leisure
activities
with
family
and
close
friends
and
is
expressed
through
fun
dress.
Dressing
the
private
self
includes
dress
presented
to
significant
others
when
among
close
friends
and
family
members
such
as
dress
for
the
&dquo;boudoir,
the
garden,
around
the
house,
barbecues,
picnics,
parties,
and
casual
sports
activities&dquo;
(Eicher,
1981,
p.
40).2
Similarly,
dressing
the
secret
self
allows
individuals
to
express
their
creative
imagination
through
fantasy
dress.
The
secret
self
may or
may
not
be
revealed
to
another
person.
According
to
Eicher,
dressing
the
secret
self
can
sometimes
be
sexual,
&dquo;such
as
seductive
lingerie
for
women
or
tight
undergarments
or
trousers
for
men&dquo;
(p.
40);
it
can
include
the
wearing
of
bold
colors
in
private
that
an
indi-
vidual
would
not
wear
in
public;
a
garment
that
hangs
in
the
closet
unworn;
or
&dquo;the
dress
of
a
carnival,
Mardi
Gras,
or
Halloween
masquerader
who
presents
the
secret
self
anony-
mously
in
a
public
situation&dquo;
(p.
40).
Eicher’s
(1981)
ideas
were
not
originally
represented
in
table
form;
Table
1
sum-
marizes
her
framework’s
main
points.
Several
researchers
interested
in
dress
have
concen-
trated
on
public
acts
such
as
dress
for
occupations
(Forsythe,
Drake,
&
Cox,
1984;
Johnson
&
Roach-Higgins,
1987;
Rucker,
Taber,
&
Harrison,
1981;
Solomon
&
Schopler,
1982),
resulting
in
little
scholarship
on
casual
dress
or
costume
use
in
the
United
States.
Ironically,
cross-cultural
research
has
highlighted
dress
associated
with
celebrations
and
festivals
in
other
cultures,
but
few
scholars
have
con-
centrated
on
American
celebrations
and
associated
dress.
Exceptions
include
Edmonson’s
(1956)
and
Bridges’
(1988)
studies
of
Mardi
Gras,
Belk’s
(1990)
study
of
Halloween,
’Dress
is
defined
as
"an
assemblage
of
body
modifications
and/or
supplements
to
the
body"
(Roach-Higgins
and
Eicher,
1992,
p.
1).
2
In
1981,
Eicher
used
the
term
"intimate"
to
describe
this
part
of
the
self.
Since
her
original
work
on
the
framework,
Eicher
has
renamed
this
self
as
"private"
(Michelman,
Eicher
&
Michelman,
1991
and
Eicher,
Baizerman
&
Michelman,
1991).
at UNIV OF KENTUCKY on October 26, 2015ctr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
224
Table
1.
Eicher’s*
(1981)
framework
of
dress
and
public,
private
and
secret
aspects
of
the
self.
*Eicher,
J.
B.
(1981).
Influences
of
changing
resources
on
clothing,
textiles,
and
the
quality
of
life:
Dressing
for
reality,
fun,
and
fantasy.
Combined
Proceedings,
Eastern,
Central,
and
Western
Regional
Meetings
of Association
of
College
Professors
of
Textiles
and
Clothing,
Inc.,
36-41.
and
Belk
and
Costa’s
(1996)
study
of
modem
mountain
men.
Given
the
emphasis
of
research
on
dress
for
occupa-
tions
(public
self),
we
know
less
about
dress
associated
with
leisure
(private
self),
and
American
dress
associated
with
celebrations
and
private
situations
(secret
self).
Dressing
the
public
self,
which
Eicher
refers
to
as
reality
dress,
often
is
institutionalized
and
marks
transitions
in
an
individual’s
life;
examples
include
leaving
school
and
entering
the
world
of
work,
and
rituals
of
baptism,
marriage
and
death
(Stone,
1965,
p.
244).
Because
dressing
the
public
self
is
institutionalized,
it
is
more
accessible
for
study
than
dress
for
private
and
secret
aspects
of
the
self.
But
an
individual
does
not
participate
solely
in
public
life.
In
fact,
life’s
most
important
events
for
some
individuals
occur
away
from
work
and
public
view.
Both
Eicher
(1982)
and
Kaiser
(1990)
call
for
additional
research
on
leisure
dress
and
costuming.
These
areas
have
potential
for
our
understanding
of
the
self
and
individuals’
creative
self-
expression.
Consequently,
this
study’s
purpose
is
to
exam-
ine
Eicher’s
proposal:
are
private
and
secret
aspects
of
the
self
communicated
through
dress
and
does
this
use
vary
by
sex,
age
or
income.
Theoretical
Background
Stone
(1965)
states
that
dress
is
necessary
to
establish,
maintain
and
alter
the
self
during
communication.
An
individual
observes
another’s
dress
prior
to
verbal
commu-
nication
and
therefore
dress
can
set
the
tone
for
interaction.
Stone
outlines
dress’s
contributions
to
two
types
of
social-
ization.
Anticipatory
socialization
occurs
when
individu-
als
take
on
roles
they
anticipate
enacting
in
the
future.
For
example,
adult
anticipatory
socialization
can
occur
in
lei-
sure
situations
when
an
ambitious,
young
executive
dons
traditional
golf
clothing
to
show
his/her
ability
to
move
up
to
the
next
level
of
financial
success
with
its
inherent
social
obligations.
Fantastic
socialization
occurs
when
individuals
play
non-realistic
roles,
for
example,
Superman
or
Wonder
Woman.
Adult’s
fantastic
socialization
is
different
from
children’s.
Children’s
fantastic
play
occurs
in
public
(such
as
a
day
care
facility),
while
adult
fantastic
socialization
often
occurs
in
private
(such
as
at
home).
Stone
uses
male
examples
to
make
his
point:
&dquo;in
the
bathroom,
behind
closed
doors
and
before
a
secret
mirror,
the
man
may
become
for
an
instant
a
boxer,
an
Adonis,
an
operatic
virtuoso&dquo;
(p.
243).
Similarly,
female
examples
include
a
woman
imagining
herself
as
her
favorite
sports
figure,
a
fashion
model,
or a
dancer.
This
study,
in
Stone’s
terms,
investigates
dress
associ-
ated
with
adult
anticipatory
and
fantastic
socialization.
This
includes
instances
when
individuals
appear
in
public
in
leisure
dress
or
costume,
times
when
an
individual
appears
in
intimate
contexts
and
times
when
an
individual
is
alone
or
with
an
intimate.3
According
to
Stone,
the
fact
that
adult
play
-
i.
e.,
anticipatory
and
fantastic
socialization
-
is
often
more
private
does
not
diminish
its
significance.
Huizinga
(1970)
identifies
the
qualities
of
play as:
being
freely
chosen,
having
rules
and
order,
producing
captivating
enchantment
in
a
&dquo;magic
world,&dquo;
an
&dquo;in-group&dquo;
that
excludes
outsiders,
a
contest
for
some
achievement
or
for
the best
representation
of
something,
a
stepping
out
of
everyday
reality
into
a
higher
reality,
ritual
performance,
a
hallowed
play-ground
place
and
a
joyful
mood
with
full
awareness
that
participants
are
involved
in
a
pretense.
Cos-
tuming
provides
a
playful
and
liberating
experience.
Adult
play
and
consumption
practices
have
been
stud-
ied
among
female
bicyclists
(Casselman
&
Damhorst, 1990),
baseball
fans
(Holt,
1995),
river
rafters
(Amould
&
Price,
1993),
flea
market
participants
(Sherry,
1990)
and
modem
mountain
men
participants
(Belk
&
Costa,
1996).
Although
clothing
has
been
included,
the
consumption
approach
of
these
studies
reaches
beyond
clothing
to
many
other
prod-
ucts.
For
example,
Belk
and
Costa
(1996)
report
that
for
modem
mountain
men
participants
to
fully
appreciate
the
overall
fantasy
of
the
1825-1840
rendezvous
reenactment
they
must
purchase
equipment
such
as
period
tipis
and
tents,
camp
chairs,
cooking
equipment,
muzzleloading
rifles
and
other
related
items
costing
several
thousand
dollars
and
taking
years
to
acquire
(p.
41-42).
Such
serious
leisure
3
According
to
Michelman,
Eicher
and
Michelman
(1991),
"public
dress"
refers
to
those
items
of
clothing
that
relate
to
established
social
roles,
"private
dress"
refers
to
dress
shared
with
special
friends
but
not
family,
and
"secret
dress"
refers
to
dress
previously
revealed
to
no
one
but shared
with
the
psychiatrist
during
the
study
(p.
379).
The
terms
public
and
private
in
this
study
are
seen
as
congruent
with
these
definitions
of
public,
private
and
secret
dress.
at UNIV OF KENTUCKY on October 26, 2015ctr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
225
pursuits
depend
on
&dquo;invented
tradition.&dquo;
Invented
tradition
involves
ritualistic,
symbolic,
norm-driven
and
repetitive
behavior,
the
specific
characteristics
of
which
imply
&dquo;con-
tinuity
with
the
past&dquo;
and
lead
to
or
enhance
community
formation
(Hobsbawm
&
Ranger,
1983,
p.
1).
As
Belk
and
Costa
also
note,
play
is
an
important
element
in historic
reenactments.
The
present
study
focuses
on
costume
within
the
context
of
adult
play
in
reenactment
situations.
Sex’
Differences.
Key
to
this
study
are
sex
differences
within
Eicher’s
framework.
Eicher
states
we
know
very
little
about
fantasy
dress
and
the
secret
self,
but she
hypoth-
esizes
that
American
society
allows
women
(more
so
than
men)
to
act
out
fantasies
and
purchase
dress
for
the
secret
self.
Eicher’s
hypothesis
is
supported
by
research
showing
that
girls
engage
in
dress-up
play
to
a
greater
extent
than
boys
and
develop
a
higher
level
of
clothes
awareness
(Stone,
1965;
Vener
&
Hoffer,
1965).
Research
also
suggests
that
men
may
not
feel
they
have
permission
for
fantasy
dress,
as
American
men
have
more
restricted
dress
codes
than
Ameri-
can
women
(Cahill, 1989;
Davis, 1988;
Solomon
&
Schopler,
1982).
Thus,
it
was
anticipated
that
this
study
would
sup-
port
previous
findings
that
women
feel
they
have
more
freedom
for
fantasy
dress
than
men.
Eicher’s
hypothesis
is
supported
by
Stone
(1965)
and
Davis
(1988)
who
offer
theories
about
men’s
dress.
Stone
relates
men’s
anxiety
about
dress
to
the
ubiquitous
mother
who
he
characterizes
as
primarily
responsible
for
children’s
s
socialization
during
the
early
20th
century.
During
that
era,
young
children,
regardless
of
sex,
were
dressed
alike
in
lacy
gowns,
dresses
and
long
hair
-
images
today
more
frequently
associated
with
girls
(Paoletti
&
Kregloh,
1989).
In
Stone’s
study
males
reported
that
until
they
reached
an
age
to
wear
long
pants,
they
were
teased
by
older
boys
and
called
&dquo;sissy.&dquo;
Consequently
when
these
men
made
cloth-
ing
choices,
they
selected
non-feminine
dress.
Although
Stone’s
theory
of
the
ubiquitous
mother
is
time-specific
and
not
universally
accepted
(Kaiser,
1990),
it
does
give
researchers
an
opportunity
to
support,
refute
or
update
his
theory.
For
this
study,
Stone’s
theory
sug-
gests
that
men
may
not
feel
they
have
society’s
permission
to
assume
effeminate
dress
and
men’s
reality
or
everyday
dress
reflects
a
generalized
sexual
anxiety
from
being
socialized
by
women.
This
anxiety
restricts
men’s
ability
to
dress
for
fantasy.
This
restrictedness
may
cause
men
to
look
for
acceptable
non-feminine
arenas
to
dress
the
secret
self.
Davis
(1988),
on
the
other
hand,
considers
late
20th
century
male
dress
anxiety
to
be
rooted
in
the
1800s
when,
with
the
decline
of
European
aristocracy
and
the
rise
of
industrial
capitalism,
men’s
dress
became
one
dimensional
(i.
e.,
a
means
of
communicating
economic
success
only).
As
a
result,
men
assumed
a
highly
restricted
dress
code
whereas
women
continued
following
an
elaborate
dress
code
as
they
had
for
centuries.
If
Davis’
(1988)
view
of
men’s
dress
as
one
dimen-
sional
is
accepted,
attempts
to
imply
anything
other
than
serious
work
practices
(such
as
fantasy)
would
be
a
threat
to
communicating
economic
success.
Consequently,
&dquo;humor
is
an
element
seen
only
in
women’s
fashions
and
rarely
seen
in
men’s
fashions&dquo;
(p.
30-32)5.
Understandably,
men
rarely
take
chances
in
dress
and
rarely
dress
publicly
for
fun
and
fantasy.
Therefore,
risk-taking
and
experimentation
in
dress,
for
this
study,
were
considered
conceptually
inherent
in
both
fun
and
fantastic
dress.
Childhood Memories.
The
Memory,
Imagining
and
Cre-
ativity
(MIC)
Interview
Schedule
(Wilson
&
Barber,
1983)
has
been
used
in
other
studies
to
determine
a
fantasy-prone
personality.
Wilson
and
Barber
(1983)
found
childhood
experiences
were
significant
to
the
fantasy-prone
personal-
ity
during
adulthood.
Adults
who
were
severely
punished
as
children
were
more
likely
to
fantasize.
Fantasy
was
believed
to
have
developed
as
a
childhood
coping
mecha-
nism,
retained
into
adulthood
by
fantasy-prone
personali-
ties.
Consequently,
this
study
explores
childhood
memories
and
their
impact
on
fantasy
dress
and
the
secret
self.
Age
and
Income.
Two
additional
variables,
age
and
income,
were
included
to
determine
if
these
variables
had
any
effect
on
dressing
private
and
secret
aspects
of
the
self.
Two
possible
outcomes
were
hypothesized
with
respect
to
age:
young
adults,
with
fewer
social
responsibilities
and
obligations
and
media
exposure
to
divergent
appearances
dress
more
often
for
fun
and
fantasy
than
older
adults;
or
older
adults,
enriched
by
their
cumulative
life
experiences
(Robinson,
1921)
dress
more
often
for
fun
and
fantasy
than
younger
adults.
There
is
limited
information
about
the
effect
age
has
on
dressing
the
self.
Stone’s
(1965)
theories
include
little
about
adult
socialization.
Eicher’s
(1981)
framework
in-
cludes
age
in
dressing
for
reality
and
the
public
self.
Wil-
son
and
Barber
(1983)
have
shown
how
childhood
experi-
ences
can
affect
an
adult’s
later
experience
and
make
the
adult
fantasy-prone.
Belk
(1990)
found
Halloween
experi-
ences
changed
according
to
age
group.
Michelman,
Eicher
and
Michelman
(1991)
and
Eicher,
Baizerman
and
Michelman
(1991)
documented
public,
private
and
secret
self
aspects
in
adolescent
dress.
Miller,
Jasper
and
Hill
(1991,
1993)
documented
fun
and
fantasy
dress
among
college
age
costume
wearers.
Modem
mountain
men
ren-
dezvous
participants
range
in
age
from
infancy
to
those
in
their
eighties
(Belk
&
Costa,
1996,
p.
19).
Adults
have
not
been
studied
extensively
with
respect
to
costuming
the
self.
How
do
adults
costume?
Do
adults
of
different
ages
have
varied
experiences
dressing
the
self
or
dressing
in
costume?
Income
is
inextricably
tied
to
discussions
about
sex
roles
and
visual
communication
of
those
roles
in
American
society.
It
was
hypothesized
a
higher
income
would
allow
for
more
fun
and
fantasy
dress
activities.
A
higher
income
might
allow
an
individual
more
leisure
time
to
engage
in
activities
that
require
costume.
Additionally,
historically
accurate
costumes
are
expensive.
For
example,
dedicated
Civil
War
reenactors
would
not
consider
wearing
a
uniform
made
from
fabric
containing
polyester
(L.
Forbess,
per-
4
For
this
study,
sex
is
defined
as
the
biological
categories
of
female
and
male
(Kaiser,
1990,
p.
65).
Sex
was
selected
instead
of
the
more
inclusive
term
gender
(socially
constructed
concepts
of
feminine
and
masculine)
because
respondents
were
more
familiar
with
the
term.
5
Exceptions
to
Davis’
statement
occurred
in
the
late
1980s
and
the
early
1990s.
Gaultier
is
one
designer
who
has
promoted
whimsical
fashions
for
men.
at UNIV OF KENTUCKY on October 26, 2015ctr.sagepub.comDownloaded from
226
sonal
communication,
February
12,
1990).
The
price
of
an
historically
accurate
uniform
starts
at
$850
(Hodges,
1995).
Some
reenactors
believe
wearing
contemporary
eye
glasses
diminishes
historically
accurate
dress.
One
reenactor
group
requires
purchase
of
historically
accurate
frames
(Liles,
1994).
The
expense
of
historical
accuracy
is
a
legitimate
business
expense
for
vendors
at
reenactments
(G.
Schluter,
personal
communication,
March
10,
1990).
Belk
and
Costa
(1996)
report
the
estimated
prices
of
items
required
for
modem
mountain
men
rendezvous
participation
(p.
41).
Questions
posed
by
this
research
include:
how
does
in-
come
affect
private
and
secret
self-expression
through
dress?
Do
individuals
with
large
incomes
spend
more
on
costumes
than
individuals
with
lesser
incomes?
Does
income
limit
or
enhance
private
and
secret
self-expression?
Research
on
Eicher’s
Framework
Eicher’s
framework
has
been
used
for
two
studies
of
adolescents.
Michelman
et
al.
(1991)
sought
to
discover
how
individuals
use
dress
in
self
development
and
identity
communication.
Differences
in
adolescent
psychiatric
pa-
tients’
dress
were
based
on
expression
of
public,
private
and
secret
self
aspects.
A
teenage
male
presented
a
heavy
metal
rock
star
and
drug
user
public
self-image.
Another
teenage
male
expressed
the
private
self
through
blue
eye
shadow
for
intimate
heterosexual
dating
situations.
A
fe-
male
teenager
revealed
the
secret
self
through
a
hidden
maternity
outfit,
secretly
wishing
to
be
pregnant.
Eicher
et
al.
(1991)
used
suburban
high
school
stu-
dents
as
informants
about
the
public
self.
Informants
did
not
seem
to
differentiate
between
public
and
private
as-
pects
of
the
self,
at
least
not
as
much
as
adults
(p.
682).
Adolescents
were
surprised
and
embarrassed
by
questions
about
dress
and
the
secret
self,
thus
differentiating
them
from
psychiatric
adolescent
patients.
These
researchers
concluded
that
indepth
information
on
dress
behaviors
requires
more
prolonged
contact
than
a
one-session
inter-
view.
Eicher
et
al.
( 1991 )
speculated
there
may
be
differ-
ences
between
adults
and
adolescents
in
their
public,
pri-
vate
and
secret
self
experiences.
Research
on
Costume6
6
Researchers
who
focus
on
costume
in
American
cel-
ebrations
include
Stone
(1959),
Hill
and
Relethford
(1979),
Miller
(1990),
Miller
et
al.
(1991,
1993),
Belk
(1990),
Belk
and
Costa
(1996),
and
Hickey,
Thomas,
and
Foster
(1988).
According
to
the
public,
private
and
secret
self
framework,
costume
was
implied
by:
&dquo;[The
secret
self
is
expressed
by]
the
dress
of
a
carnival,
Mardi
Gras,
or
Halloween
masquer-
ader
who
presents
the
secret
self
anonymously
in
a
public
situation&dquo;
(Eicher,
1981,
p.
40).
One
example
of
anecdotal
evidence
about
costume
is
a
local
newspaper
article
at
Christmas
time
that
advertised
madrigal
dinners
designed
to
take
guests
back
to
Elizabethan
times
through
the
use
of
costumes,
food
and
music
(Thompson,
1995,
p.
3).
Even
though
popular
press
articles
are
numerous,
little
research
has
been
published
about
how
individuals
use
costumes
to
facilitate
self-expression
while
participating
in
these
and
similar
events.
Stone’s
(1959)
purpose
in
a
Halloween
study
was
to
critique
&dquo;mass
man&dquo;
and
depict
Halloween
as
a
holiday
to
train
children
to
become
consumers.
He
observed
that
costumes
differed
between
boys
and
girls.
Of
eighteen
trick
or
treaters,
two
boys
wore
fantastic
socialization
cos-
tumes ;
one
was
a
clown
suit,
the
other
a
pirate
suit.
One
girl
wore
an
anticipatory
socialization
costume;
a
Japanese
ki-
mono
(p.
377).
Belk’s
(1990)
study
of Halloween
costumes
revealed
that
sex
differences
reflect
culturally
stereotyped
sex
roles
(p.
510).
College
students’
sex
differences
in
Halloween
costumes
have
also
been
reported
(Hill
&
Relethford,
1979).
Hill
and
Relethford
(1979)
documented
that
costumes
with
a
sexual
theme
were
chosen
more
frequently
by
male
college
students
(costume
with
female
breasts
covering
the
entire
figure
or a
costume
of
a
giant-sized
penis)
while
females
chose
costumes
depicting
male
roles
(football
player).
College
female
role-related
costume
choices
re-
flect
anticipatory
socialization.
Once
girls
mature
into
adults,
anticipatory
socialization
in
dress
becomes
less
pro-
nounced
and
fashion
offers
a
fantasy
outlet.
Boys,
on
the
other
hand,
may
have
permission
to
participate
in
fantastic
socialization
on
Halloween,
but
once
they
grow
into
adult-
hood
their
daily
dress
choices
are
limited.
Miller
et
al.
(1991,
1993)
reported
college
students’
costume
experiences.
In
1991,
Miller
et
al.
reported
sex
differences
among
college
students’
identity
and
role
per-
ceptions,
depending
on
their
Halloween
costumes.
Female
college
students
were
less
likely
than
males
to
disguise
identity,
were
less
likely
than
males
to
believe
they
had
new
identities
with
costumes,
and
were
less
likely
than
males
to
believe
they
could
play a
different
role
on
Halloween
with-
out
a
costume.
While
mask
use
to
hide
one’s
identity
is
not
the
present
study’s
focus,
Miller
et
al.
(1991)
and
Hickey
et
al.
(1988)
demonstrate
the
masking
effect
on
an
individual’s
s
role
perception.
Miller
et
al.
(1993)
reported
a
connection
between
drink-
ing
alcohol
and
wearing
a
costume
among
college
students.
Belk
(1990)
found
that,
as
college
students
recalled
their
pre-teen,
teenage
and
most
recent
Halloween
experiences,
drinking
alcohol
played
a
more
significant
role
in
later
years.
These
findings
differed
for
males
and
females.
Belk
and
Costa
(1996)
report
that
many
modem
mountain
men
participants
are
heavy
drinkers
(p.
35).
The
present
study,
although
not
concerned
with
non-dress
activities
such
as
drinking
alcohol,
will
investigate
sex
differences
among
adults
whose
costuming
is
not
confined
to
Halloween.
Belk
and
Costa
(1996)
studied
consumption
practices
of
individuals
involved
in
modem
mountain
men
rendez-
vous
activities.
They
found
that
the
majority
of
partici-
pants
were
white
males;
approximately
one
third
are
fe-
male
(Belk