Table 5.
Torso characteristic data compared between the three fit groups (too small, good fit, and too large) using One-Way ANOVA (normally distributed data; difference in group means) or Kruskal–Wallis (non-normally distributed data; difference in mean rank).
| Torso characteristic | Fit | N | Mean | SD | SIG | vs. good fit | vs. too large |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stature (cm) | Too small | 14 | 167.2 | 7.9595 | 0.035* | 0.997 | 0.318 |
| Good fit | 30 | 167.0 | 4.8955 | 0.028* | |||
| Too large | 53 | 163.8 | 6.23 | ||||
| Body Mass (kg) | Too small | 14 | 78.0 | 10.241 | 0.002* | 0.092 | 0.001* |
| Good fit | 30 | 71.0 | 10.4861 | 0.214 | |||
| Too large | 53 | 66.5 | 9.1836 | ||||
| Iliocristale Height (cm) | Too small | 14 | 102.1 | 5.93 | 0.188 | — | — |
| Good fit | 30 | 101.7 | 3.61 | — | |||
| Too large | 52 | 100.0 | 4.99 | ||||
| Waist Height (cm) | Too small | 14 | 107.3 | 5.5 | 0.115 | — | — |
| Good fit | 30 | 106.6 | 3.52 | — | |||
| Too large | 53 | 105.4 | 6.42 | ||||
| Suprasternale Height (cm) | Too small | 14 | 136.1 | 6.57 | 0.03* | 1 | 0.307 |
| Good fit | 30 | 136.0 | 4.07 | 0.023* | |||
| Too large | 53 | 133.2 | 5.46 | ||||
| Front Length (cm) | Too small | 14 | 33.9 | 1.15 | 0.112 | — | — |
| Good fit | 30 | 34.3 | 2.17 | — | |||
| Too large | 52 | 33.2 | 2.58 | ||||
| Chest Depth (cm) | Too small | 14 | 39.5 | 1.99 | 0.014* | 0.418 | 0.037* |
| Good fit | 30 | 38.7 | 1.55 | 0.081 | |||
| Too large | 53 | 37.9 | 1.58 | ||||
| Chest Breadth (cm) | Too small | 14 | 29.6 | 1.58 | <0.001* | 0.004* | <0.001* |
| Good fit | 30 | 27.7 | 1.84 | 0.557 | |||
| Too large | 53 | 27.3 | 1.56 | ||||
| Bi-acromial Breadth (cm) | Too small | 14 | 37.8 | 1.64 | 0.883 | — | — |
| Good fit | 30 | 37.7 | 1.73 | — | |||
| Too large | 53 | 37.6 | 1.6 | ||||
| Neck Circumference (cm) | Too small | 14 | 33.9 | 1.54 | 0.006* | 0.124 | 0.005* |
| Good fit | 30 | 32.9 | 1.84 | 0.349 | |||
| Too large | 53 | 32.4 | 1.73 | ||||
| Waist Circumference (cm) | Too small | 14 | 80.9 | 5.6 | <0.001* | 0.026* | <0.001* |
| Good fit | 30 | 75.3 | 7.49 | 0.396 | |||
| Too large | 53 | 72.7 | 5.66 | ||||
| Hip Circumference (cm) | Too small | 14 | 107 | 7.71 | 0.056 | — | — |
| Good fit | 30 | 103 | 7.12 | — | |||
| Too large | 53 | 101.5 | 5.45 | ||||
| Over-Bust Chest Circumference (cm) | Too small | 14 | 96.0 | 6.6443 | 0.003* | 0.068 | 0.002* |
| Good fit | 30 | 90.5 | 7.1124 | 0.485 | |||
| Too large | 53 | 87.6 | 9.1305 | ||||
| Under-Bust Chest Circumference (cm) | Too small | 14 | 80.3 | 4.4869 | 0.01* | 0.111 | 0.006* |
| Good fit | 30 | 77.7 | 6.7732 | 0.592 | |||
| Too large | 53 | 75.7 | 4.7941 |
The third last column provides the p-value for the main effects of fit group on each torso characteristic. The final 2 columns provide p-values of the pairwise comparisons between the three fit groups, as determined through post-hoc analysis.
*
represents significance at p < 0.05. For variables that were found to have no significant difference between fit groups, post-hoc tests were not conducted and the corresponding cells were marked with a long dash.