Research Trends in Textiles and Clothing: An Analysis of Three Journals, 1980–1999

Abstract

The purpose of this research was to assess trends in research, research strategies, data analysis techniques, funding sources, affiliations, and the use of theoretical frameworks in textiles and clothing research. Empirical research focused on textiles and clothing and published in three home economics–related journals—Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences, Family and Consumer Science Research Journal, and Clothing and Textiles Research Journal—from 1980 to 1999 was content analyzed (N = 586). Although survey methodology and experimentation were the first and second most‐used research strategies in all but one 5‐year period from 1980 to 1999, fieldwork has increased. Data analysis techniques were primarily quantitative, with increases in the use of some advanced statistical techniques. However, the qualitative treatment of data also increased. Suggestions for graduate education and faculty development are offered.

Textile Product Design Approach With Conceptual Design Method

“…Bu dönemlerde yayımlanan makaleler incelendiğinde sadece %8'inin tasarım ile ilgili olduğu görülmektedir (Bye, 2010:210). 1980 ile 1999 arasında yayımlanan makalelere bakıldığında ise, estetik/tasarım/imalat konularında % 8,5 oranında makale olduğu ifade edilebilir (Lennon, Johnson ve Park, 2001). Sage veritabanında bulunan Clothing Textiles Research Journal (CTRJ) incelendiğinde ise, 1982 ile 2010 yılları arasında tasarım araştırmasını konu alan makalelerin sayısının oldukça az olduğu ve ulaşılan 707 makalenin 30 tanesinin (%4 oranında) tasarım kelimesini anahtar kelimelerinin içerisine almış oldukları belirlenmektedir.…”

Analyzing Research Trends in the Chinese Fashion Market in Clothing, Construction and Merchandising -Based on secondary research of Korean Journals from 1998 through 2010-

“…연도별/학회지별/연구주제별 논문비율을 살펴본 연구 들은 대부분이 피복과학, 의복구성, 복식디자인, 의상심 리, 패션마케팅, 복식사 등의 분야에 대하여 다루었다 (Rha et al, 2000;Lennon et al, 2001). Lennon et al(2001) (Na, 1996).…”

Constructing Knowledge for the Future

“…Reality, therefore, can be known by individuals who have a hand in shaping it. We might also consider the realities of those disciplines that have had a hand in shaping our own, those that we have looked to for some of the substantial theoretical frameworks currently used, and to the history of science as a whole, wherein our knowledge is often situated in relation to the natural or social sciences and typically within the positivist tradition (Lennon & Burns, 1993;Lennon, Burns, & Rowold, 1995;Lennon, Johnson, & Park, 2001). The process that links reality to knowledge-making is reflexive.…”