Serviços customizados
Inglês (pdf)
Artigo em XML
Referências do artigo
Enviar este artigo por email
Citado por SciELO 
Similares em
SciELO 
Permalink
Introduction
Fashion, which is a specific and very dynamic form of mass behavior, might be expressed as a temporary advantage of a style, an idea, adopted in a certain part of life or culture over a period of time. Fashion expresses the interaction between human and clothing. At the same time, it is a unique process that is constantly evolving within the old social forms by promoting innovation. It is worth noting what the famous French fashion designer Pierre Cardin said about fashion: “Fashion means renewal. The principle of this comes from the nature. The tree sheds its old leaves, and the human takes off the clothes that he/she is tired of.
When any garment is used excessively, people are quickly fed up with them.” Based on these ideas, we can say that fashion saves people from the fatigue of sameness. At the same time, fashion is a holiday for the eyes at the background of everyday life (S.Kirsanov). People want to please each other, dress nicely, and look good.
Modern fashion reflects the corresponding changes to the period of post mo der nism in society. The diversity of postmodernism, as before, has led to the lack of a unified fashion standard for everyone in modern fashion. Different social groups have different value systems and, accordingly, numerous and ever-changing fas hion standards. It is possible to observe many "fashions" instead of one fashion. This is because fashion is related to lifestyle and the behavioral characteristics of certain social groups.
Before explaining the assessment of fashion as a lifestyle factor, as well as the impact of fashion on a healthy lifestyle, let's pay attention to the essence of this concept. Lifestyle (Latin modus vivendi) - combines communication, behavior, habits, thoughts and reflects a person's individual life form, lifestyle (Gurbanova, 2019). In other words, lifestyle is a form of human existence that manifests it self in actions, interests, and thoughts. That is, lifestyle is a set of a number of features of human life and activity that determine the direction of life. Human interests, needs, habits, worldview, education, and values play an important role in the formation, improvement, and sustainability of a lifestyle. Its main features are labor, daily life, socio-political and cultural activities of people, as well as various behavioral habits and manifestations.
Development
The concept of lifestyle was first developed by M. Weber (1911) and later introduced to the science of psychology by A. Adler (1912). Human lifestyle has been the most researched topic in local and foreign literature, especially in recent years: Kostes (1970); Toffler (1970); Burde (1994); Gurbanova (2019); Mustafayev (2020); and others.
The Western school of sociology is characterized by the idea that the individual belongs to a certain social group, class, which connects the problem of life style with the characteristics of the social structure of society. (P.Burde, M.Weber, T.Veblen) (3).Other researchers analyzed the concept of lifestyle in terms of the integrity of the personality, its internal and external manifestations, the process of shaping the way of life (A. Adler, H. Ansbacher (1920), G. Allport (1937)). In modern times, the concept of lifestyle is analyzed in relation to the characteristics of active lifestyle and consumer style, leisure time. (late XX-early XXI century T. Lilovich, Y.A. Stebbing, L. Steinberg, etc.). Other researchers emphasize the role of the mass media in shaping lifestyles through the influence of the mass audience. (R.S Allen, A. Bandura, M. Eslin, T. F. Hartnegel, etc.).
As we mentioned earlier, the concept of lifestyle was introduced to psychology by A. Adler. Defining an individual lifestyle as "the completeness of individuality", A. Adler argues that the lifestyle consists of various motives, character, interests and values that manifest in all forms of human behavior. After Adler, the concept of lifestyle has not been significantly studied in any psychological theory. An individual's lifestyle and characteristics are described in other terms: "individualization"(K.G.Yung (1907-12)), “stylistic features”, “expression”, “manifestation plan”, “life scenarios” (E. Bern (1961)), life strategies (path, perspectives) (L.S.Rubinstein (1935)), A.Abulkhanova (1991), A.Kronik (1994)), “life options” (V.N.Druzhinin (2000)), “individual way of life” (Sh.Bruyler (1933)), “meaning of life” (V. Frankl (1959)) et al. In general psychology, it has been replaced by the concepts of "individual activity style" and "cognitive styles" (Aliyev, 2006).
As mentioned above, in Frankl's works, the concept of lifestyle is called "the meaning of life."According to Frankl, who calls modernity the excitement of the century, if a person cannot find the meaning of his life, he cannot live. If he cannot find the meaning of death, then he is doomed to live and has no reason to die. According to Frankl, the question "What is the meaning of life?" is similar to the question "What is the best move in chess?" Because it is impossible to say what is the best move in a chess game without taking into account the latest state of the pieces, as well as the unique personal qualities of the opponent. This also applies to human life. So the meaning of life is different for each person.
E. Bern is one of the other researchers studying the concept of lifestyle. According to E. Berne, the scenario is a constantly evolving life plan formed in early childhood under the influence of parents. The family scenario has traditions and expectations established for each member of the family, which is successfully passed down from generation to generation. The family scenario has traditions and expectations established for each member of the family, which is successfully passed down from generation to generation.
Having received a ready-made prescription from the parents, the child begins to play the necessary roles for the realization of the drama of life, taking a psychological position. Thus, scenarios operate throughout everyone's life. They are based on decisions made in childhood and parenting programs.
E. Bern suggested 6 methods to survive the scenarios listed below. He called them simply scenario examples or scenario processes, and so me times just scenario. Each scenario corresponds to a certain ancient Greek myth: 1) the "Never" script or the Tantala script; 2) “Not yet” script or Hercules script; 3) “Then” scenario or Arachno script; 5) “Approximate” script or Sisyphus script; 6) “Open ending” script or the script of Philemon and Bavkid (Aliyev, 2006).
According to modern views, human individuality is a product of one's activities. Thus, it manifests itself in the selection of areas of social experience, in the areas of activity and relationships that the individual owns. For this reason, it is not a set of individual features of human life, but its specificity that is the starting point of D.A. Leontyev's (2007) psychological research.
According to D.A. Leontyev, lifestyle is a unique way chosen by people to achieve a goal. Within the framework of lifestyle, each person creates his own subjective opinion about himself and the environment. In other words, it is a set of tools to adapt to the environment (Butenko, 1978).
Taking advantage of the classification Academician Bestuzhev (1978); Lisichin (1982), and others about lifestyle, he distinguishes 4 main categories of lifestyle: 1. Economic - "standard of living"; 2. Sociological - "quality of life"; 3. Social - "psychological - lifestyle"; 4. Social - “economic -life structure”.
The standard of living belongs to the economic category and implies a higher level of well-being. This includes production activities (work). Lifestyle is a socio-psychological category. It is assessed by external forms of behavior, mainly reflecting the characteristics of individual or group behavior, focused on daily life: the organization of work and leisure; extracurricular activities, life structure; behavioral maneuvers; pleasure, value choices, etc.
Quality of life is a sociological category. According to Y.P. Lisichina, this can be included in intellectual activity as a sphere of social activity. Life structure is a socio-economic category that encompasses human life and culture. Its components such as medical, physical activity (sports and physical culture) can be mentioned here. According to Y.P. Lisichin, this can be included in intellectual activity as a sphere of social activity. Life structure is a socio-economic category that encompasses human life and culture. Its components such as medical, physical activity (sports and physical culture) can be mentioned here.
Summarizing the above, we can say that the methods of life reflect the principles of social organization of the subject's forms of life activity, and "lifestyle" reflects the possible life options within certain principles and social norms that make up the life of society. Thus, the way of life is a set of sustainable methods and forms that make up the socio-cultural life of people (Y.P. Lisichin, 1982).
A person's lifestyle and behavior are determined by a system of needs. The demand for fashion is met by the need for innovation and imitation, which is its basis. The practice of imitation, as well as the desire for innovation, is widespread in modern society. M. Bayuoter (2007) rightly notes that imitators repeat the elements of a successful actor's activity. E.V Nesterenko’s fashionable behavior and fashionable standards-bearers were regarded by the society as a successful actor: "... his behavior, ideas, lifestyle is an example for imitation" (7).
In the twentieth century, researchers saw fashion as the emergence of a new style, the beginning of a new style age. It is no longer fashion and style that are valued, but a person's way of life. While in the 60s and 70s, researchers studied fashion as a separate criterion, today fashion is studied more broadly. Thus, fashion covers not only clothing, but also all areas of culture and human life. This means that fashion is becoming a way of life. Already in the 80's, fashion designers were required to be creative not only in clothing, but also in every field that would reflect a person's lifestyle. Ralph Lauren said in one of his interviews:"... I'm not just a designer, I create a way of life. I aesthetically change the way the world looks ..." (January 22, 1993). As an example, we can also mention the Giorgio Armani boutique. The boutique covers an area of 8000 square meters. Here are Emporio Armani (clothing, diffuse brand), Armani Jeans (clothing, jeans), Armani Casa (furniture, home textiles), Armani Sony Gallery (home appliances, music, film), Armani Profumi (perfumery), Armani Fiori (flower shop), Armani Libri (book), Armani Arte (art gallery), Armani Caffe (cafe) and Armani Nobu (Japanese cuisine restaurant). Of course, a person who visits such a store falls into the "world of Armani" according to a ready-made recipe, "Armani recipe". For this reason, the importance of fashion change is partially replaced by the concept of lifestyle (7).
Although not sufficiently studied in the local literature, the problem of lifestyle in foreign (especially western) literature is one of the most studied and relevant areas. One of the most interesting classifications of lifestyle belongs to Lyudmila Yatina. “Polystylism”. A sew stage in the Development of Fashion (1998) distinguished the following lifestyles in her work: "materialism" "pragmatism", "activism", "hedonism". “Hedonism" is characterized by practices aimed at providing entertainment and demand, self-care and taking care of one’s body, equ-orientation.
The main thing for a hedonist is not the usefulness and practicality of a new hairstyle, clothes, car or participation in mass cultural events, but the fact that it is aimed primarily at enjoying the work. Work and communication are based on this idea. In short, the basis for a hedonist is to enjoy the work he does. Today, the main lifestyle offered by the fashion industry, especially in relation to luxury products, is hedonism.
"Materialism" is also characterized by ego-orientation as "hedonism". When it comes to things, these two styles differ in the way they exist. If for the "hedonist" the acquisition of things is based on the principle of "likes or dislikes", for "materialism" the possession of things is chosen on the basis of pleasure.
For a hedonist, the source of pleasure is living at home, driving a car, while for materialist, owning a house or a car means owning an expensive property and item.
In "activism" and "pragmatism", the attitude towards people is characterized by having an alter-orientation, which is expressed not only in oneself, but also in others.
For "activists" the attitude to the world of things is valuable in action, in the desire for change, for "pragmatists" any action is valuable because it is useful, there must be a reason to own it. For example, if the value of work for an "activist" is in the process itself, in communication, in maintaining social ties, for a pragmatist it is first and foremost a gain, a career.
Today, a lifestyle characterized by hedonism and extremism prevails. At the same time, it is noticeable that a certain part of the youth is directed to a lifestyle characterized by altruism, education and creative desire. A typical lifestyle for young people is viewed through the prism of the problems of young subcultures, which excludes the majority of young people from the field of research on this topic (Goffman, 1994).
Michael Brake's “Youth Culture. Sociology of Youth Culture and Subculture in America, England, and Canada” provides a detailed analysis of the social constructs that determine lifestyle. The author distinguished the components of style, such as image, manner and argot. He also took into account the leisure time as an important point in the style. Image was reviewed as an external proof of attachment to a certain status - clothing, accessories, body ornaments (piercings, tattoos, jewelry, etc.) are important for self-presentation, to identify with an important (reference) group.
Manner is the manifestations of a person's own body: that is, gait, posture, gestures - in communication, the individual realizes his image in this way. Manners help others to appreciate the sincerity and authenticity of the style. Argot is not only a slang characteristic of a group to which an individual associates himself, real or symbolic, but also a dictionary that uses a language understood by that group. It is clear that in all these important elements of style there is something internal, it is difficult to simply describe and play the style.
These signs of lifestyle are very important to characterize youth. However, lifestyle should not be understood as a feature of this age group alone. Thus, for example, "youth" lifestyles characterized by activity, mobility, optimism, risk-taking, exclusivity, self-presentation are not just young people. Like other stylistic images, the image of "youth" emphasizes the dominant value associated with youth itself.
The style itself can be applied not by all young people, but often by adults and even the elderly, for example, is actively used in the advertising of anti-aging cosmetics or fashion machines.
Fashion, as a constantly working mechanism in a changing society, is responsible for social needs and is seen as a value. It is the objectification of the principle of society. Which in the process of fashion forms the norms of behavior and lifestyle with the development of the motives of the participants and the aesthetic values of fashion (9).
Fashion researcher T.Lyubimova characterizes fashion as a cultural event and distinguishes a number of its features:
The universality of fashion activities that can manifest itself in any object and standard: things, ideas, people, actions.
Multifunctionality - fashionable innovations are not intended for long-term storage as cultural samples, but are used for immediate consumption.
Dominance. Any object, image, idea, personality can be dominant. Which can be the center where the unity of society's lifestyle is established and stabilized as a new fashion era.
Thus, lifestyle has a complex relationship with the social structure: on the one hand, larger social class groups differ in lifestyle, on the other hand, the difference in lifestyle of social communities does not necessarily coincide with social class discrimination, and life can be found in communities belonging to different classes in one way or another. Gender, age, and education are more important for lifestyle differentiation.
It is very interesting and important to look through the role of the interaction between the “fashion” and “lifestyle” in the lives of the youth. Nowadays, “youth” is a special age group formed on the basis of the age features and characteristic values, covering a long period of the human life. The youth turned into a special socio- psychological category with their values, desires, structures, special self-awareness and their own subcultures.
Summarizing the above, we can give such a definition for the youth: youth - is a socio-demographic group of the young people characterized by their special role in the cultural, economic, social and political life of the society, having lived a period of social maturity, knowledge, labor and spiritual experience, and characterized by the ability to incorporate the best traditions of the previous generations and to fill them with their own creativity.
Lifestyle is interpreted as a sum of the patterns of stable behavior, social and cultural experiences related to the characteristics of a social group called the youth, which creates specific features of a lifestyle which are not usually applied to other age groups. Existence of cultural freedom (autonomy) of the youth, as well as the youth’s self-recognition in the cultural activity forms in the modern society turns the lifestyle of the youth into a considerable social and cultural event. Lifestyle is a key characteristic of the youth having socio-structural features in the development phase.
The active usage of fashion by the youth is explained on the one hand by strengthening their role as a subject of social change, and on the other hand by their unstable position in the society, incomplete mastering the social roles, norms and values, and by being an early stage of life. Fashion is one of the self-assertion forms for the modern youth. It can be explained by demarcation and correction functions of the fashion. The first provides their need for self-assertion, recognition and independence; and the second fosters their socialization, their integration into a "mature" society, as well as into social and cultural values. Fashion builds or shows the boders of the youth and culture on the one hand, and on the other hand, it denigrates these boders (Yunusov, 2006).
Thus, first of all, fashion promotes the formation of a special youth society; second it destroys this characteristic over time. At the same time, the youth culture was mainly created by “adult” society; therefore, it bears a special responsibility for its content. Everyone has to make a choice between different values and behaviors in their lives in one way or the other, and has to continue it. Being aware about the existence of fashion can help to make this choice in a responsible way for development of an individual and society, and without this choice there exist no personality.
Fashion - is a sphere of life which is full of various events, contradictions, social perspectives, which is characterized by high level of development. Using fashion, humans get an opportunity to have a contact with the environment, achieve a high rhythm of life, and consequently, develop.
Fashion, in its turn, plays modelling, integrating and motivating roles, and encourages humans and their groups to the social impact. This feature and its social role are determined by the formation and application of personal norms, ideals, values and behavioral patterns encouraging the people to the activity. In other words, fashion is a key part of the social mechanism of personality formation: either it acquires longing for integrity and creativity, or acts as a connector gaining typical social reactions.
The research mainly contains such an assumption that nowadays the clothes of the students of any branch, regardless of their profession, act as a self-expression way and form their lifestyle (There are no significant differences between the lifestyles and attitudes of the art students and those of other faculties to fashion. That is, the students of both the arts and human sciencies accept the fashion as the meaning of life).
In order to determine whether there is a difference between two independent groups (art students and students of other faculties) on different variables and features and to make a comparison between two groups on different variables, “T.test” analysis in SPSS programme were used. According to the analysis of the scores of both groups on "Life Orientation Test (LOT)" variable, there is no significant difference between the groups on five features of LOT. A comparison of the numeric mean and standard deviation indicators in the below statistical table of five features shows that there is no difference between the groups (Table 1).
Table 1 - Statistics of two independent groups on "Life Orientation Test (LOT)".
| Group statistics | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Group | N | Mean | Standart deviation | |
| Purpose | Art | 360 | 32.50 | 6.449 |
| Other | 360 | 33.25 | 5.869 | |
| Process | Art | 360 | 28.65 | 7.234 |
| Other | 360 | 28.20 | 6.521 | |
| Outcome | Art | 360 | 24.55 | 5.813 |
| Other | 360 | 23.85 | 3.655 | |
| Locus control - I | Art | 360 | 20.80 | 4.525 |
| Other | 360 | 20.65 | 5.147 | |
| Locus control - Life | Art | 360 | 29.80 | 5.543 |
| Other | 360 | 29.95 | 7.005 | |
In order to conduct accurate measurement between the groups and to check whether they are statistically “meaningful”, the level of “Sig” in the “T.test” table was investigated (Table 2).
According to the table, “P value” or Sig is 0.588 on “Purpose”, 0.771 - on “Process”, 0.521 - on “Outcome”, 0.890 - on Locus control - I and 0.916 - on Locus control - Life. There is no “significant difference” (in 0.05 level) between two groups on the above five features, since the P value on five features or Sig˃0.05. It should be noted that during the “T.test” analysis, when Sig≤0.05, the difference between the groups is meaningful at 0.05 level, otherwise the difference is meaningless at 0.05 level.
Table 2 - T. test on “Life orientation test (LOT)” between two independent groups.
| T. test between independent groups | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| t | df | Sig. (2-tailed) | Deviation from average | Standard deviation | 95% relevance | ||
| Low | High | ||||||
| Purpose | -.544 | 78 | .588 | -.750 | 1.379 | -3.495 | 1.995 |
| Process | .292 | 78 | .771 | .450 | 1.540 | -2.616 | 3.516 |
| Result | .645 | 78 | .521 | .700 | 1.086 | -1.462 | 2.862 |
| Locus control - I | .138 | 78 | .890 | .150 | 1.084 | -2.007 | 2.307 |
| Locus control - Life | -.106 | 78 | .916 | -.150 | 1.412 | -2.962 | 2.662 |
In a survey on fashion, outcomes by questions are as follows. The most answers in both groups to the question: “What does fashion mean for you?” were lifestyle, way of self-expression and wearing style (Table 3).
Table 3 - Answer to the question: “What does fashion mean for you?” by different groups.
| What does fashion mean for you? | ||||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Answer variants | Type of vocation | Total | ||
| Arts | Other | |||
| 1 | Lifestyle (meaning of life) | 46 | 48 | 94 |
| 2 | Self-expression style | 41 | 40 | 81 |
| 3 | Wearing style | 27 | 34 | 61 |
| 4 | Way of behaviour | 16 | 0 | 16 |
| 5 | All innovations | 13 | 14 | 27 |
| 6 | Differ | 12 | 20 | 32 |
| 7 | Looking special | 10 | 7 | 17 |
| 8 | Arts | 9 | 15 | 24 |
| 9 | Development | 6 | 2 | 8 |
| Total | 180 | 180 | 360 | |
Among answers of respondents to the question: “Why do you use fashion novelties?”, those such as using fashion novelties, feeling comfort, showing one’s individuality took prevelance in both groups. In another group, additionally, the answer: not looking worse than others ranked over (Table 4).
Table 4 - Answer to the question: “Why do you use fashion novelties?” by different groups.
| Why do you use fashion novelties? | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Answer variants | Type of vocation | Total | |
| Arts | Other | ||
| No answer | 0 | 4 | 4 |
| For using fashion novelties (J) | 48 | 34 | 82 |
| For not looking worse than others (e) | 16 | 36 | 52 |
| For showing one’s relatedness to “Fashion-forward people” (d) | 20 | 12 | 32 |
| For attracting surrounding people’s attention (c) | 24 | 10 | 34 |
| For feeling comfort (b) | 40 | 56 | 96 |
| For showing one’s activity (a) | 32 | 28 | 60 |
| Total | 180 | 180 | 360 |
Although there are observed relative differences in the answer to the question: “How do you think, which of the mentioned definitions is correct?”, answers by both groups are almost the same (Table 5).
Table 5 - Answer to the question: “How do you think, which of the mentioned definitions is correct?” by different groups.
| How do you think, which of the mentioned definitions is correct? | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Answer variants | Type of vocation | Total | |
| Arts | Other | ||
| No answer | 5 | 3 | 8 |
| Fashion is modernity and being ahead (E) | 25 | 28 | 53 |
| Fashion is a common interest (D) | 19 | 25 | 44 |
| Fashion is a set of things and definitions which are famious in certain time span (C) | 47 | 38 | 85 |
| Fashion is one’s way of behaviour to show one’s “Ego” (B) | 38 | 43 | 81 |
| Fashion is an aesthetic category forming a person’s appearance (A) | 46 | 43 | 89 |
| Total | 180 | 180 | 360 |
The answer to the question: “To your mind, which age groups of people are influenced by fashion?” was all groups of the youth in both groups. And this is one of factors showing what an important role the fashion plays in their lives (Table 6).
Table 6 - Answer to the question: “To your mind, which age groups of people are influenced by fashion?” by different groups.
| “To your mind, which age groups of people are influenced by fashion?” | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Answer variants | Type of vocation | Total | |
| Arts | Other | ||
| No answer | 2 | 1 | 3 |
| It is difficult to answer (D) | 30 | 32 | 62 |
| All age groups | 26 | 20 | 46 |
| Almost all age groups except the elderly people (C) | 32 | 51 | 83 |
| All the youth (B) | 61 | 52 | 113 |
| Just one group of the youth (students) (A) | 29 | 24 | 53 |
| Total | 180 | 180 | 360 |
Answers by both groups to the question: “How do you characterize fashion-forward people (3 variants may be shown)?” show that respondents characterize a fashion-forward person as a bold one able to be open to novelties (Table 7).
Table 7 - Answer to the question: “How do you characterize fashion-forward people?” by different groups.
| How do you characterize fashion-forward people (3 variants may be shown)? | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Answer variants | Type of vocation | Total | |
| Arts | Other | ||
| A person showing oneself and not fearing of being distinguished (a) | 39 | 28 | 67 |
| A person fearing of being distinguished by preferring to things in fashion in order to be lost in public (b) | 12 | 16 | 28 |
| A person showing his/her relatedness to a certain social group (c) | 28 | 32 | 60 |
| A non-tradiotional person open to novelties (d) | 31 | 26 | 57 |
| A person putting his/her opinions against adopted values by fashion (e) | 25 | 9 | 34 |
| A tasteless person wearing everything in fashion regardless of fitting or not (f) | 8 | 16 | 24 |
| A marionette-person falling under influence and approving things perferred by majority (g) | 17 | 29 | 46 |
| A person hiding his/her undesired appearance and specific features by means of stylish dressing (h) | 16 | 17 | 33 |
| It is difficult to answer (i) | 4 | 7 | 11 |
| Total | 180 | 180 | 360 |
Answers to the question: “How do you think, may a student’s stylish appearance show his/her level of culture?” make it clear that in both groups, the number of respondents thinking that the fashion is one of more important indicators of a level of culture is much more (Table 8).
Table 8 - Answer to the question: “How do you think, may a student’s stylish appearance show his/her level of culture?” by different groups.
| How do you think, may a student’s stylish appearance show his/her level of culture? | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| Answer variants | Type of vocation | Total | |
| Arts | Other | ||
| There is scarecely any relation between stylish appearance and a student’s lvel of culture (D) | 48 | 45 | 93 |
| There are more important indicators of a student’s level of culture (C) | 73 | 84 | 157 |
| It is one of indicators of a student’s level of culture (B) | 46 | 29 | 75 |
| Of course, it clearly shows a student’s level of culture (A) | 13 | 22 | 35 |
| Total | 180 | 180 | 360 |
The research we conducted showed that there are no material differences among hypothesis put forward by us, attitude of students studying in faculties such as arts and so on to fashion, as well as modes of lives. The hypothesis of the research almost found its confirmation. So, attitude of respondents with low Locus control life indicator is positive, they see the fashion as meaning of their lives.
While, self-realizing people according to Life Effectiveness Scale show negative attitude to fashion. This means that there is an inversely proportional relation between self-realization and fashion. I.e., the youth that don’t self-realize choose fashion as a way of self-realization, self-expression. Respondents with high results according to process scale evaluate the wearing, clothes as a means adding colour to our lives.
Conclusıons
Results of research we conducted showed that the youth’s attitude to fashion, their perception of fashion as lifestyle impacts to way of self-expression. Accepting fashion as lifestyle, they try to approve themselves.
I guess a structure of inspiration by dress audience isn’t expressed correctly to the expected degree. The youth not only attract attention of people, but they also express themselves in full and know significance of ways for doing this. That’s why the definition of confirmation clears up an emotional-psychological world of fashion audience to R.B.Fishman and other researchers. The dress is not a means confirming a person or a main means of proving.
For individuals not finding this or any means since their period of youth, this talent also is more significant. Fashion means more things for youth. First, as a means for proving ang showing oneself, fashion refers to any social layer.
Second, it is a form allowing the youth to distinguish themselves from other social classes. Proving oneself is a main point of the youth’s fashion, shows their individuality and features. It is related to maintaining a stylish thing, showing stylish attitude and stylish views, helps to the youth to express their “Ego” and maintain this status. Ages between 19 and 24 was characterized with non-staility of social and material state, because almost the most of young people in this interval of ages are observed to show and exprfess their society during their studying in universities. Fashion in this class mainly means the youth’s independence.
So, as two events completing and identifying (defining) each-other which lead to cultural changes in the society, we can come to a conclusion that there is an obvious relation between fashion and lifestyle. So, fashion closely relates to people’s lifestyle. Moreover, it is a social norm spontaneously formed in a certain lifestyle during this or another period (regardless of everyone’s trying to manage this phenomenon by purposely impacting on activity of firms producing mass consumption goods recently).
