Introduction:

Over the last decade, the increasing influence of social media in cultural behaviour has resulted in a change in the ways in which businesses interact with their target audiences, especially within the fashion industry.

 

Platforms like MySpace (2003) and Friendster laid groundwork for a new era of social interaction and Facebook (2004) first established the stage for social media’s development and expansion. 

 

Since the first high profile social media marketing (SMM) campaign ‘Share a Coke’ by Coca-Cola (Alicia, 2022), this new concept has been employed across all industries and social media has become a platform beyond just interpersonal connections, evolving into a strong advertising ecosystem which offers businesses ways to communicate with their target consumers through a new variety of ad types. Since 2009 (Gravell, 2020) both the mass market (fast fashion) and luxury fashion sectors have been utilizing social media as a way to connect with target audiences.

 

The fashion industry more specifically than others has accelerated in this field and within the last five years influencer marketing and sponsored content has become a primary form of advertising (Schwartz, 2023). Fast fashion brands, in particular, embrace this contemporary form of marketing as a way to appear on trend and create a brand identity that is in line with their audiences.

 

Gen Z consumers have emerged as a crucial force in the ongoing evolution of the digital landscape, leveraging their power and heavily influencing the marketing and communication tactics used by brands. As a generation with values strongly focused on societal and environmental change, there is growing demand for brands to be authentic. Today, being authentic is “a core asset in mainstream marketing” (Södergren. J, 2021), because, as Ahmad and Decombe (2022 state, Gen Z consumers are more inclined to purchase from brands who pay attention to social issues like diversity. As a result, Gen Z presumes higher standards for brands, going beyond the products they offer, and holds an expectation of openness, accuracy in depiction, and morally decent behaviour (Mintel, 2022).

 

Recent increases in activism, advocacy and public demand - primarily driven by Gen Z on social media platforms, means inclusivity and representation have become increasingly topical issues within the fashion industry (Pinder, 2023). Brands that target Gen Z as their primary consumers are being forced to address their historical lack of representation and retract from a lack of diversity. As well as being a direct response to societal expectations, Amed et al, (2019) wrote in a report for McKinsey and Co, that the shift towards inclusivity has strengthened the levels of connection with consumers, especially the ‘woke’ members of Gen Z. However, despite the rise in discussion surrounding inclusion, the industry has seemed to plateau at tokenistic ‘surface level’ images, without implementing mirroring values into their brands and diminishing the problematic structures (Llamas, 2022).

Disability representation is an increasingly insistent and under-researched topic in the context of fashion and inclusivity. Many fashion journalists have noted that it is the only thing missing in fashion’s inclusivity movement (Farra, 2021).

 

While this literature review focuses solely on disability representation, it is important to note that varied body size, race, religion, gender, sexuality etc. have also historically been under-represented. However, a comparison of the progress of inclusivity in these areas to that made in the representation of disability, highlights the fact that there is a need for greater progress in the promotion of disability inclusivity. With one in four people in the UK having some form of disability (Ward 2021), the fashion industry’s neglect and under representation in this area is significant. Although it has previously proven to be a controversial topic, in recent years disability representation has become a crucial component as the fashion industry develops a considerable transition in terms of inclusivity (Lawson, 2021).

 

 

1.2

Rationale:

 

Existing research on diversity, including diversity within SMM, has not necessarily addressed the issue in the context of disability (Qayyum et al., 2023). Similarly, studies on tokenism are primarily focused on race or sexuality. Within the researchers’ findings, there is little to no existing literature which considers the perceptions of Gen Z on either topics of tokenism, or SMM disability representation.

 

In response to these gaps in literature, this research study is believed to be one of the first investigations that explores the complex motivations behind the ‘woke’ Gen Z’s UK direct to consumer (DTC) fast fashion purchases, tailored towards their perceptions on tokenism and online disability representation. Hence, advancements in knowledge are made within this sphere.

 

 

1.3

Background:

 

Historically, the context of representation as a whole within the fashion industry is a troubling pattern of tokenism and marginalization. For many years the industry focused on promoting an idealized definition of beauty, excluding those with disability, who had little variety in clothing choice other than hospital robes or tracksuits due to the lack of adaptive clothing. (Kim, 2021).

Though the importance of diversity and inclusion in marketing and consumer research has been well studied and documented, Qayyum et al. (2023) point out that disability has been notably averted. Conversely, it is important to highlight that advocacy for disability rights and inclusivity has roots extended much further back in history. The modern disability rights movement (1960) gained considerable momentum for disability inclusivity, and resulted in disability rights becoming more integrated into broader social movements and equality. Helen Keller, for example, laid groundwork for these later movements, encouraging the emergence for special education and disability specific organization during the 1920s (Waxman, 2020).

 

Visionary fashion photographers Nick Knight and Lucy Jones, emerged as a pioneering force in the realm of disability representation within the fashion industry. Seated Collection, 1991, by Lucy Jones, and Fashion Able by Nick Knight for Dazed Magazine, are certainly mile stones for disability representation within the fashion industry. More recently, Jillian Mercado who has muscular dystrophy modelled for Diesel in 2014 after entering an open casting, furthering the transformative journey that is tentatively beginning to reshape the way disabilities are portrayed in the fashion industry and beyond.

 

In a recent development in line with this progression, Editor-in-Chief of British Vogue, Edward Enniful has said that he turns down major fashion brands when they do not meet his vision of inclusivity (Grierson, 2023). Recent covers have featured Ellie Goldstein, a model with Downs Syndrome, and content has focused on 19 disabled people from the worlds of fashion, sport and art (Nicolle, 2023).

 

Whilst these instances may seem positive, the people pioneering diversity in the area of disability, like Knight and Mercado, are still having to champion this cause and have been joined in their advocacy by disproportionately low numbers.

 

Foster and Pettinicchio’s (2021) findings show that disability is often framed and marketed in a specific way: more than not, people with disabilities are depicted to inspire pity or in ways which appear tokenistic.

 

Photographer Allen Jones sparked public debate on the issue of ableism after his cover for Interview Magazine depicted able bodied influencer Kylie Jenner sitting in a gold framed wheelchair. Journalist Jordan Foster (2021) raised concerns surrounding the propriety of using an able-bodied person to pose as someone with a disability, stating that disability is not a fashion statement. Kimhekim’s S/S 2019 show featured models with IV bags and bandages, seemingly mocking and belittling disabled people and their everyday struggles, for capitalist gain (Brookes, 2023). This type of undermining behaviour reinforces the lack of importance and insincerity that disability afforded within literature, luxury and mass market fashion.

 

 

Mass market and luxury fashion segments represent distinct echelons within the industry, catering to different demographics and embodying contrasting philosophies. Whilst mass market fashion aims to create accessible, affordable clothing for a broad consumer base, luxury emphasizes quality and exclusivity, targeting a smaller, exclusive demographic. This report will focus on mass market/fast fashion, specifically DTC brands, such as PrettyLittleThing, Jaded London, Boohoo and ASOS.

 

 

As addressed by Husain, Samad and Qamar (2021), luxury’s disability inclusivity efforts, in comparison to mass market, are more thorough and achieve a higher depth of understanding and genuine portrayal of concern for better inclusivity, and are hence better received by consumers.

 

Luxury designer Gucci have recently been named one of the best places to work for disability inclusion (Lim, 2022), after participating in the annual Disability Equality Index, and scoring 80 of 100. The brand is hoping to swap short-term tokenism for long-term change by starting internally, and giving better opportunities for disabled people in the workplace (Webb, 2022).

Additionally, high end brand Tommy Hilfiger designed Tommy Adaptive in 2016, which is a ‘disability friendly’ clothing line featuring garments with adjustable hems, magnetic buttons, and much more. The brand also collaborated with visually impaired director James Wrath to shoot the ad for the line, which now releases two collections per annum and is accessible to buy globally (Media Marketing, 2018).

 

Comparatively, journalist Bella Webb (2022) points out in an article for Vogue Business that the adaptive market remains untapped by mass market brands, of which some (PrettyLittleThing) have been labelled as “problematic” due to their claims of inclusivity being as yet lacking in deep rooted diversity (Steele, 2019).

 

Whilst the luxury sector is predicted to outperform the rest of the industry financially in 2023 (Amed et al., 2022), Kim and Phua (2020) point out the importance of remembering that the much broader and therefore more diverse consumer base that mass market has, due to its accessibility, in comparison to luxury. This, alongside fast fashion brands’ failure to exert genuine disability inclusivity, is why this body of research specifically centres around the mass market sector.

 

Whilst it may appear contradictory to focus on fast fashion brands which are not eco-friendly in parallel with deeper research surrounding Gen Z’s values (values in which sustainability is apparently highly appreciated) (Brand, Rausch and Brandel, 2022)), stats show that while Gen Z are a strong force in the increase of sustainable fashion, the reality is that 90% of Gen Zers still purchase from fast fashion brands (Mazzu, 2023). Fast fashion brand ‘Shein’ is a $100 billion company, almost exclusively fuelled by online sales to Gen Z, demonstrating the clear gap between ideals and practice (Trueman, 2022).

 

The attitude-behaviour gap (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1970) is a framework that explains the inconsistencies that can occur between what people believe (attitude) and how they actually behave, by taking into account external barriers such as price (Düffelmever, 2012). This model would assume Gen Z’s continued purchase from brands with poor disability representation is due to the external barrier of higher cost of brands who have positive disability representation(Faries, 2016), although this study aims to expand this knowledge.

 

 

1. - Literature Review

2.1: Gen Z - An Age of Realism:

 

Generation Z (Gen Z), born between 1995 and 2012 (Kane, 2023) are a cohort recognized for their unique blend of digital expertise, social consciousness, and cultural fluidity (Barrington, 2019). As a generation who grew up in a world saturated by technology and social media, this cohort have shaped the digital communication norms and more so than previous generations, embrace the ideals of authenticity, diversity, inclusivity and social justice, using their digital influence to advocate for such issues (Meola, 2023). Gen Z are also willing to challenge traditional norms to extend their approach to identity, embracing a fluid spectrum of gender and sexuality (Klein, 2023).

 

Latterly, brands have strategically shifted their focus on to the Gen Z consumer, recognising that the dynamic and digitally immerse generation wield a large spending power, and have an “outsized impact on culture and economy” (Schneider and Lee, 2022). Ritch, Dodd and Cannon (2021) find that Gen Z consumers are sceptical in terms of ‘woke washing’, especially when this clashes hypocritically with brands’ previous marketing strategies and imagery. Woke washing can be defined as “the appropriation of ethical and progressive values as a form of advertising to improve the reputation of the company without demonstrating a real commitment to the values that are communicated.” As this results in negative brand perception, there is a clear need for deeper research into how Gen Z perceive online disability representation in terms of tokenism. Research into consumer loyalty shows that it is vital to retain a reputable brand image that considers their target consumers values, and lifestyles (Tran et al., 2022). Gen Z are a powerful force in shaping a more equitable future, hence this phenomenological research project being tailored towards understanding their unique values and motivations for purchase.

 

Social Identity Theory emphasizes the importance of understanding target consumers’ beliefs and values - this is how social identities are commonly classed (Tajfel & Turner, 1985). Brands aim to create a distinct brand identity that evokes shared values and aspirations with their consumers and creates a sense of in-group membership and differentiation from out-groups.

 

As Gen Z’s core values consist in part of inclusivity and diversity, Social Identity Theory suggests that Gen Z may reject brands who engage in tokenism, as this may offend their social identity and clash with ideologies. This is confirmed by Naidu (2018) as their study finds that factors influencing Gen Z’s consumption behaviour are self-concept and brand-image congruity. Similarly, Vajkai Kovács and Zsóka’s (2020) study suggests that anti-consumption and brand avoidance is caused by brand and consumer values not aligning - these values more than often being social or environmental based.

However, as Özkan (2017) points out, Gen Z are not homogeneous and their values can differ, hence the brand-value misalignment possibly varying accordingly (as previously highlighted when considering the attitude-behaviour gap). Similarly, literature surrounding Gen Z’s consumption habits considers other factors such as economic factors, peer pressure, and other demographic impacts (Lisboa, Vitorino and Antunes, 2022).

窗体底端

 

On the whole, the majority of literature agrees that Gen Z are a socially conscious generation, who would rather purchase from a brand that supports social issues than one that does not (Berisha and Connerton, 2019; Criticos, 2022; Tokareva, 2023). As social activism is one of their defining traits (de Jong & Ignatzek, 2022), Gen Z search for authenticity, diversity, transparency and trustworthiness and educate themselves about brands (Biondi, 2021).

 

2.2: The Inclusivity Movement:

 

The inclusivity movement is an ever-evolving social phenomenon which aims to create an inclusive environment where all people - regardless of race, size, gender, disability etc - are given equal opportunities (Weldon, 2006). The movement, which has roots in theories of social justice, human rights, and intersectionality, acknowledges the significance of diversity, equity, and equality in promoting peaceful and prosperous societies (Fraser, 2008). The aim of the movement is to confront and eliminate institutionalized prejudice and diminish barriers that keep marginalized groups from properly integrating into and gaining from social, economic, and political institutions (House of Lords, 2021).

 

Relevant to this study, Francis and Hoefel (2018) write for McKinsey and Company, that Gen Z are “radically inclusive”. Their online survey proves that 66% of Gen Z believe that communities are created through interests, rather than economic backgrounds and levels of education, which marks much higher than Millennials, Gen X and Baby Boomers, and reminds that as a generation, Gen Z are very much in tune with the inclusivity movement and diversity in general. Francis and Hoefel (2018) state that due to the significance placed on individual identity and rejection of stereotypes, acceptance and inclusivity are one of Generation Z’s core behaviours and therefore a key factor to consider when investigating their perception of disability representation and attitudes towards tokenism.

 

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention define disability as: 

 

“Any condition of the body or mind (impairment) that makes it more difficult for the person with the condition to do certain activities (activity limitation) and interact with the world around them (participation restrictions)” 

 

It is commonly understood that diverse representation is vital for consumer engagement, across all industries (Willems, Brengman and Van Kerrebroeck, 2019; Teng and Chang, 2020; Synnot et al., 2022), but even more so in the fashion industry (Ananda et al., 2019). Disability, however, under this umbrella title, is near to absent. Haller and Ralph (2016) highlight that there are very few adverts portraying people with disabilities due to the small target audience, yet it should be a crucial area for advertisers to consider with Gen Z in mind.

 

Whilst there is a significant lack of academic literature surrounding this statement, many online fashion articles address this matter with a similar perspective. Emily Farra (2021) comments for Vogue, that when it comes to inclusivity, we consider one’s “race, gender, sexuality, age, size, and religion, but rarely one’s ability.” Similarly, Adenipekun’s (2022) stats show that whilst 90% of businesses say they prioritise diversity and inclusion, only 4% consider disability as a part of this.

 

It is suggested by Oliver (1989) that the discount of disability could be due to the perception of disability as a deficiency through a medical model. The medicalisation of disability creates exclusion and stigmatization which in turn exacerbates societal barriers, culminating in disability being left marginalized within the inclusivity movement.

 

The medical model of disability and the social model of disability are two distinct approaches that outline and interpret the concept of disability. The medical model sees disability as an individual’s impairment or health condition (Brisenden, 1986; Marks, 1997), whereas the social model of disability perceives disability as a result of societal barriers and attitudes, rather than an individual’s impairment. It has emphasis on changing societal structures and attitudes to promote inclusion, accessibility, and equal opportunities for everyone, regardless of their disabilities (Marks, 1997).

 

Whilst both models have contributed to shaping policies and perceptions of disability, the social model offers a more comprehensive and holistic perspective that aims to remove barriers and promote a more inclusive society (Davis, 2016, p.196). Hence this body of research favoring the social model of disability, as the aim is to create recommendations for change.

 

Lack of knowledge, research and understanding has resulted in the construction of stigmas and misconceptions, leading to unconscious bias and ultimately the marginalisation of disabled persons from conversations regarding inclusivity (Goering, 2015). Waqas, Hamzah and Salleh (2020) use the Consumer Culture Theory (CCT) to emphasizes that a lack of (disability) representation online can contribute to a sense of invisibility and exclusion among individuals, therefore affecting how they are perceived within the concept of inclusivity. The fashion industry’s lack of accommodation for and accessibility to the less able bodied only exacerbates the situation further, as highlighted by Farra (2021):- standing-room-only venues exclude wheelchair users; lighting projects forget to consider the needs of the visually impaired and people with epilepsy.

 

The world disables me, not my body - Kelly Knox.

 

Model, actress and activist, Jillian Mercado, stated that even as a young girl, she knew there was a hole in the fashion industry, and felt that she was not reflected in the material that was being produced and printed in the media (Brown, 2018). Mercado’s statement captures the stigmatisation and marginalisation of people with disabilities across all cultural industries, extending beyond just the fashion industry and into every aspect of life, concurring with the CCT. Mercado represents the Gen Z consumer and their values through her advocacy and activism in fighting the lack of representation of people with disabilities in the fashion industry and their enduring stigmas (Devany, 2020). Having modeled and worked for corporations popular within the Gen Z community – such as Glamour, Cosmopolitain and Beyonce’s Formation world tour (Business of Fashion, n.d.) – and as a prominent figure in the new wave of models challenging beauty ideals in the fashion industry, Mercado is a relevant reference in conjunction with Gen Z and their demands for social change surrounding the topic of inclusive representation.

 

 

2.3: Tokenism

 

Tokenism is a practice often cloaked in the guise of inclusivity. The process lowers underrepresented groups to mere tokens, acting as symbols for businesses to virtue signal their advancements in inclusivity, without any substantive efforts to address the deep-rooted disparities they face (Sherrer, 2018). It not only undermines the real struggles and experiences of marginalised communities by reducing them to superficial and performative roles (Huziej, 2022) but encourages egotistic activity within workplaces (Bogicevic, Li and Salvato, 2023).

 

In the realm of the fashion industry tokenism has polluted marketing across all platforms, particularly social media, as brands scramble to appear inclusive to their socially conscious and diversity driven target consumers, Gen Z (Williams, 2020). Some brands are arguably attempting to capitalise on this desire for inclusivity by using disabled people as a part of their marketing campaigns – a direct example of tokenism (Hammett, 2019). Pitcher (2021) study covers the rise in ‘woke-washing’, specifically occuring when fast fashion brands use “social movements to increase sales without how their business is complicit”. The link between diversity and fashion has always been complicated. While fashion firms have frequently used marketing and commercial strategies to address the need for diversity, the way in which these strategies have been implemented has been criticized and labeled as tokenistic (Voir Editorial Team, 2021).

 

Tokenism is briefly depicted in Carlyle’s (2022) research, which analyses and compares fast fashion brand H&M’s social media engagement before and after the George Floyd tragedy. Results showed that while the content engagement, content quality, brand recognition and diverse representation increased, the clear purpose of the post and relevance of content in alignment with the brand decreased. From these results, tokenism to add profitability and create trends in consumer expectations is apparent. Additionally, the internal analysis of DEI (diversity, equity and inclusion) showed that the brand only fulfilled 19% of the DEI criteria, evidence which further suggests the increase in diversity was made for brand profitability due to increase in consumer expectations. Using H&M as an example demonstrates that should comparable studies be undertaken on other UK DTC fast fashion brands, similar results would be rationally expected, although it is unfair to assume that the entire fast fashion sector engages in tokenistic marketing, as H&M only represents one portion of this part of the UK DTC fashion industry.

 

Whilst not related to disability representation being concerned with racial representation, this examples brands’ tokenistic use of a diverse range of models based on consumer expectations and circumstantial trends.

 

As previously noted, there is a substantial lack of academic writing surrounding the topic of disability representation in relation to tokenism, thus the significant gap in research and further need for exploration and critical evaluation. Where understandably disability representation is a controversial topic and a heterogeneous category (Wong, 2020), which is possibly the reason for the absence of such literature, there are many journalistic articles and real-life instances which back up the statement that UK fast fashion brands are tokenistic in the way they represent disability within their SMM. It is to be noted that these journalistic articles are opinion based and unsubstantiated by primary research, hence the writing having potential bias. However writing and journals are both based on real occurrences within the fast fashion landscape.

 

In 2022, during London Fashion Week (LFW), DTC brand Pretty Little Thing held their own catwalk which showcased their new collection by influencer Molly-Mae Hague. Although not a part of LFW, the brand tweeted that they were “London Fashion Week ready”, which successfully created the impression that they were involved with the event and undoubtedly gained much interest from fashion fans around the world (Mooney, 2022). Their catwalk featured a wide range of models including plus-sized, wheelchair (Tess Daly) and a model with a prosthetic leg (Browning, 2022). Many journalists commented on the ‘refreshing’ range of models cast to walk on the runway, which was aimed at representing everybody who shops at PLT (O’Connor.K, 2022). Hague even highlighted that her collection could be “worn by all” and made sure to showcase the collection on different body types (Wightman-Stone, 2022). Model Tess Daly expressed her excitement and shock at being selected for the runway stating that “not many brands - if any at all - use disabled models on their runways”.

 

With such emphasis on the inclusivity of the brand during the time of this specific runway, it is therefore surprising that there is sparse disability representation throughout their social media accounts and none on their app.

 

 

Of the disability representation on Pretty Little Thing’s social media, there is a video featuring Lucy Sleight, who has a form of dwarfism known as achondroplasia, wearing a pair of the brand's trousers that are, given her disability, too large. Using an - at the time - trending sound on TikTok, it ends with her standing in the trousers, which now fit after being altered (O’Dell, 2023). Whilst this video was posted with the intention of being inclusive to those with dwarfism and other physical disabilities, it instead highlights the fact that the brands’ clothing is NOT inclusive and requires altering for garments to fit. The ad has since received much backlash on social media, with one person commenting that the ad has “done the opposite” of what was intended and instead proved that they do not cater for people with disabilities. Model Gina Atinuke Knight responded to the video by reminding the brand that “inclusion is more than check marks”, which again substantiates the statement that fast fashion brands are tokenistic towards disability representation in their social media marketing and that their external marketing does not align with internal values and practices.

 

Another example regards the exclusively online fast fashion brand Chi Chi, who invited disabled model Lucy Dawson to collaborate with the brand to celebrate disabled bodies. Later, however, Dawson stated that she felt “tokenised” when she was not invited to the launch party – which she would have been unable to attend anyway due to the chosen venue’s inaccessibility (Bowler, 2022). On social media, Dawson expressed that it was unfortunately not an “isolated incident”. This again provides evidence that the industry continues to capitalise on movements featuring people with marginalised bodies to sell their goods to those able-bodied people (Bowler, 2022).

 

In contrast, according to Haller and Ralph (2006), Marks and Spencer’s TV advert featuring a deaf woman is non tokenistic due to her engaging in activities within her social group, conveying a message of inclusiveness. Additionally, HSBC’s advert featuring a blind employee, is perceived positively as it shows the bank employs and welcomes blind people (although HSBC is obviously not within the realm of fashion).

 

The comparison to PLT’s marketing, which has been fairly labelled ‘tokenistic’, TikTok (fig_),  due to it actually highlighting the need for alteration of its clothing for disabled bodies, is notable. Haller and Ralph (2006) suggest it is essential that images or videos used in online marketing must avoid creating the impression that people with disability are a burden or require assistance.

 

 

2.4: Social Media Marketing?

 

Developments in the uses of social media have resulted in power shifts, where most of the time the consumer has great ability to influence, create, produce, and distribute content (Carlyle, 2022). Kim and Johnson (2016) provide evidence that consumers have greater power in how brands make decisions and market their products, resulting in an increase in concatenated efforts in addressing social issues like diversity.

 

According to research surrounding this topic, increased representation benefits the business, which raises concerns surrounding tokenism in relation to increased sales - McKinsey and Company show that diverse organizations are more likely than ever to outperform non-diverse companies in terms of profitability (Dixon-Fyle et al., 2020). Since advertising has transitioned from traditional broadcast to omni-channel marketing (Knoll, 2015), there is a growing need for better-integrated marketing and communication, as the industry’s consumer and media segmentation is ever-expanding (Lynch, 2019). Lim et al. (2019) prove that the change has been significantly aided by influencers and/or content creators who work with fast fashion companies to market their goods.

 

Tafesse and Wood (2021) state that fast fashion companies in the UK have been able to embrace representation through social media influencers. Influencers are popular social media users who have accumulated a numerically substantial and dedicated following online, examples being Molly-Mae Hague, Ami Charlize and Gemma Owen (Casaló, Flavián and Ibáñez-Sánchez, 2020). The parasocial relationship between influencer and follower, means that follower views the influencer as authentic, hence fast fashion companies recently beginning to collaborate with influencers (Jin, Muqaddam and Ryu, 2019). Djafarova and Rushworth, 2017 found that the products promoted by influencers hold higher regard to Gen Z target consumers in part due to this authentic persona, which creates the desired brand impact. Moreover, influencers enable brands to highlight diversity and inclusivity in a more genuine and approachable way - Lee and Eastin (2021) show that consumers perceive influencers as sincere, genuine and trustworthy.

 

Södergren and Vallström’s (2020) is one of few studies that analyses the effects of disabled bodies in influencer marketing. It reviews interactions on disabled influencer Kelly Knox’s social media accounts. The results highlight the positive effects that an influencer with a disability can have on Gen Z consumers: Kelly Knox is praised by her followers daily for “helping to change society's perception of beauty”. Although this study was conducted from a single influencer’s perspective, it underlines the positive change that this recognition is giving to disability representation and Gen Z’s understanding of the importance of this movement.

 

Fast fashion companies can also reach out to many communities and show a wider range of identities to their target audience by working with influencers from a variety of backgrounds. Influencer-driven strategies are now a powerful tool for brands to engage with consumers and show their dedication to representation (Newton, 2022). 

 

“Social media browsing positively impacts Gen Z consumer behaviour” (Naidu, 2018). It is important to acknowledge and understand target consumers and their values in order to create long lasting brand consumer relationships, as Wyman, Bach and Schulte (2023) research finds that 91% of Gen Z consumers say they will pay extra for brands that support causes they care about.

 

 

3: Methodology

 

The purpose of this chapter is to outline the details of the research approach used in this research project. It will detail the philosophical worldview, ontological and epistemological assumptions, research approach, research design, as well as the sampling, ethics, and limitations.

 

The strategy of inquiry will be phenomenology, as the aim of this research will be to gain the unique perceptions of Gen Z consumers. The prospective body of research will be carried out in a number of methodical steps that have been planned prior to completion. The research approach will be qualitative, using the research method of interviews, as to gain a deeper understanding of the participants perceptions, rather than a general idea.

 

Due to this study being centred around Generation Z’s perceptions, the participants being interviewed will be strictly Gen Z fast fashion consumers. Ages will be lessened from 18-24, due to ethical limitations regarding involving those under the age of 18. Both male and female participation will be encouraged, assuming they purchase from fast fashion brand/s regularly - at least once a month. This is so the insight on consumer behaviour is relevant and accurate to those who purchase from the focus of the study.

Additionally, the individual must be on social media and have clear contextual understanding and knowledge of the concentrated fast fashion brands’ social media pages (Instagram, TikTok, Twitter, Facebook etc.). As the goal for this research is to provide recommendations for improvement, this criteria will achieve the most effective and tailored results, assuming it is met.

 

Participants will be sourced both in person and via social media posts to ensure a fair variation of gender and age are selected, and each individual can be interviewed without prior personal connection to the researcher/interviewer.

 

Before interviews commence, individuals will be made to sign a consent form, confirming their agreement of participation; be made aware of the ethics sheet; and given an overview of the research study. The researcher has also passed an ethics assessment prior to the study.

 

 

Objectivism vs. Constructivism:

Objectivism (Rand, 1943) and Constructivism (Piaget, 1915) are two opposing methods which are employed to explore a variety of phenomena. Objectivism posits that there is an objective reality (Peikoff, 1993), whereas constructivism posits that people construct their knowledge because of their own experiences and interpretations of their environment (Jonassen, 1991). As this research is investigating Gen Z participants’ unique perceptions, a constructivist approach is the appropriate methodology as it recognizes the impact of social context and subjective experiences in forming perceptions.

Being such a socially conscious generation, Gen Z are especially influenced through their lived experiences in terms of inclusivity (Moscrip, 2019). A constructivist approach will mean the researcher will better comprehend the participants’ varied and changing opinions.

 

Ontological Assumptions:

Ontological assumptions shape the underlying beliefs about the nature of reality and the social phenomena being investigated, and are critical for guiding research design and interpretation of findings (Hudson and Ozanne, 1988).

 

According to constructivism, reality is interpretive and built through unique individual interactions (University at Buffalo, 2022). By taking this stance, this study acknowledges that the perceptions of Gen Z participants on tokenism and disability representation within SMM, are subjective conceptions, not objective reality. The individual perceptions are impacted and constructed by social, historical and cultural situations, and shaped by human experiences and beliefs (Martin, 2022). Constructivism understands that different individuals may have different interpretations of the same phenomena.

 

With the ontological assumptions being so multifaceted and contingent, this study aims to understand and uncover the complexities of how Gen Z consumers perceive tokenism and disability representation within UK DTC fast fashion brand marketing on social media, and gain deeper knowledge about why their perceptions are the way they are.

 

 

Epistemological Assumptions:

 

Epistemological assumptions pertain to how the knowledge can be understood - the relationship between the interview participant and the reality, or how this reality is captured or known (Carson et al., 2001). A constructivist stance emphasizes the importance of understanding the phenomena from the participants perspective. It seeks to gain a deeper understanding of the individual's meanings, values and beliefs. Constructivism recognises the need for broader context within which social phenomena occur, to gain a comprehensive understanding.

 

Additionally, within the epistemological framework of constructvism, phenomenology is relevant to this research. To better comprehend participant's viewpoints and lived experiences, phenomenology focuses on how they interpret the outside world (Neubauer, Witkop and Varpio, 2019). In the context of this study, a phenomenological approach acknowledges the value of documenting Gen Z consumers' first-hand experiences and subjective interpretations of tokenism and disability representation in fast fashion brand SMM.

 

The philosophical approach of phenomenology within qualitative research will allow the researcher to gain a deeper understanding of the lived experiences of the participants. Phenomenology delves deeper rather than broader (Good, 2023) and will uncover underlying emotions that the Gen Z participants bring which affect their participation in the brands.

 

Glazek, Adu and McFeeters (2018) state that phenomenology should be used when studying a phenomenon which is currently being directly or indirectly experienced by individuals and that, as a researcher, you are expecting these individuals to share their experiences and their thoughts on said experience. With the topic of disability representation within the fashion industry and marketing being current, the researcher hopes that Gen Z participants will find the topic familiar and share  current experiences and thoughts on the topic, resulting in further knowledge being made.

 

Qualitative research design is conducive to inductive research as it involves creating and developing theories from observations of specific data (Tenny, Brannan and Brannan, 2022).

Qualitative research design is the most suited as constructivism acknowledges the subjective nature of human experiences and individual perspectives and therefore a deeper understanding of perceptions. Through techniques like interviews, where participants can freely express their thoughts, beliefs, and interpretations, qualitative research design enables the researcher to record the subjective viewpoints of Gen Z participants. This style of approach provides a deeper understanding of how and why the participants have the perceptions that they do, hence the research design being interviews.

 

Inductive reasoning focuses on the contextual understanding. Constructivism emphasizes understanding of social phenomena within their specific context, and inductive reasoning allows for identification of patterns, themes and meanings that emerge from the collected data  (Bhandari, 2022). Examining individual cases builds contextual understanding that contributes to the broader understanding of the phenomenon being investigated.

Inductive reasoning is also useful for the creation/development of theory (Dudovskiy, 2011). Rather than starting with a preconceived theory/hypothesis, using a constructivist worldview aims to develop theories and concepts through data analysis, which is made easier through inductive reasoning as themes and patterns can be outlined and new insights and understandings can be developed. Extensions on existing theory is arguably necessary, as it can enhance predictive power, especially within a complex demographic like Gen Z, who have grown up in a digital age, and often view social issues through an intersectional lens (Wilson, 2021). Creating new/developing existing theories means that new challenges can be addressed, and key concepts and definitions can be refined, whilst considering the diverse perspectives of Gen Z.

 

Inductive reasoning also provides flexibility and openness to explore unexpected findings, while adapting the research process/questions as new insights emerge from the data. This way, more relevant responses can be collected.

Additionally, deeper exploration of nuances and diverse perspectives are reached through inductive reasoning, making leeway for a range of recommendations that differ due to individual lived experiences.

 

 

Limitations:

 

Small Sample Size

Interviews provide valuable in depth exploration of individual experiences, however this research design limits the generalization of results, as such a small sample size does not reflect the whole of the Gen Z population.

 

Lack of Control

The researcher/interviewer will have a lack of control over the data collected, purely due to the fact that it is based on lived experiences, and so there may be high variability in responses, leading to the challenge of maintaining consistency across interviews and reaching one conclusion.

 

Time and Resources

Due to the in depth nature of interviews, conducting and analyzing data will be time consuming, and limited to how much time the researcher/interviewer has before completion.

 

Limited Objectivity

Achieving complete objectivity of interpretation of data can be difficult as the researcher’s interpretations may still be influenced by their own perspectives and knowledge, especially as the research is regarding such a delicate topic.

 

Ethical Considerations

This research approach involves delving into participants’ personal experiences, which can raise ethical concerns related to privacy and confidentially. Participants may feel their experiences are too personal and decide to withdraw before data collection, resulting in an inadequate primary research collection.

 

Difficulty in Recruitment

As interviews are such a time consuming approach, the researcher may find it difficult to find individuals who are willing to participate, especially with such a specific criteria.

 

Reliance on Participant

There is a reliance on the consumer to be willing to share their thoughts and experiences, and articulate themselves well. They may have difficulty expressing their thoughts and not provide adequate, accurate descriptions. Additionally, the researcher will be relying on participant’s knowledge of social media accounts, and the term tokenism.

 

 

4: Findings

 

The data accumulated through phenomenological research, in the style of interviews highlights several critical aspects of consumer attitudes and behaviors in the context of inclusivity and representation in online fast fashion shopping and social media marketing (SMM). It sheds light on a complex landscape of perceptions and attitudes surrounding disability representation in media.

 

4: Findings

 

The data accumulated through phenomenological research in the style of interviews, highlights several critical aspects of consumer attitudes and behaviors in the context of inclusivity and representation in online fast fashion shopping and social media marketing (SMM). It sheds light on a complex landscape of perceptions and attitudes surrounding disability representation in media.

 

Upon thematic analysis, the researcher has identified recurrent themes. These themes are:

 

Convenience vs Morals

Generational Awareness

Influence of Influencers

Broad Category of Disability

 

Primarily, there is a noticeable understanding of tokenism within social, corporate and fashion environments. This stems from, as all participants agree, the generational awareness that Gen Z have. The majority of participants put this down to the fact that they are a “woke” (participant 2, participant 5) and “chronically online” (participant 3) generation, with social media contributing to a large part of their awareness, due to its participation in the discussion and prevalence of tokenism and disability representation.

 

One glaring observation was the pervasive lack of disability representation across all participants. Even when asked to identify instances of poor recognition, participants collectively struggled to name a single UK DCT fast fashion brand with accurate disability representation (that hadn’t already been shown as an example), suggesting an evident blind spot within the fashion industry. Furthermore, the fact that participants primarily provided examples of tokenism in relation to race, rather than disability, highlights a tendency to overlook disability in discussions regarding representation.

 

Despite a general consensus on the deficiency of disability representation, participants also recognised the inherent complexities in accurately representing such a diverse group, labelling disability as a “broad category”. Participants 12 and _ acknowledged that most disabilities that are represented - in popular culture, not just the fashion industry - are ‘visible’, which is not accurately representative of the lives and experiences of all those with disabilities, as some are not obviously apparent. Participants pointed out that people with autism, deafness and blindness, have disabilities too, just not ones that are easily visible through an image. Invisible disabilities are “hard to ‘represent’ through photographs”, as stated by participant 10. This seemed to lead to a preference for a proactive approach, advocating for disability inclusion as a fundamental value within brands rather than just a showcase on social media.

 

Although all participants did not approve of the lack of recognition, with participant _ stating it is “sad”, the convenience and cost factor of UK DCT fast fashion emerged as a recurring theme. All participants emphasized their preference for the affordability, price and accessibility of fast fashion and although the values of the brand didn’t align to their own, 9/12 participants said it would not deter them from purchasing from these brands. The concept of money was the leading factor in the challenge of steering consumers towards brands that prioritize disability representation: participant 6 stated that they “don’t feel [they] have the money to be picky and shop from other brands”.

The remaining 3 participants put their deterrence down to the fact that they wouldn’t be able to “picture [themself] in the brand, so why would I purchase from them?”.

Alongside this, intersectionality became apparent within these participants’ answers, as they mentioned that they were either affected by disability (participant 5), plus sized, or a “woman of colour” (participant 7). Participant 7 also mentioned previous personal experiences with discrimination, which may allude to the rejection of brands who do not align with their personal values.

 

Intersectionality also came into play with the entirety of participants, through the acknowledgement of their own privilege and repeated segregation of themselves into categories based on size, race, and identity. This self-awareness may explain the generational awareness, stemming from the normalisation of inclusive representation during their upbringing - which was pointed out as differing from earlier generations.

 

There was a shifting tone throughout the interviews, which is particularly notable. Whilst the interviews initially started with a positive tone, showing positive sentiments towards fast fashion brands, for example “their representation is really good” (participant 1), as the interviews progressed, the tone gradually gave way to doubt: “it definitely makes me see the brand in a different light”. This shift in tone may be attributed to the awakening of awareness of the topic of disability representation as it was raised during the interviews, as some participants mentioned their disregard of disability within the inclusivity movement. Most stated that this was down to the lack of disability representation within the fashion industry and across social media. This raises questions about whether a lack of representation in this specific are goes unnoticed because it is not accurately pointed out to consumers.

 

The term ‘woke’ surfaced repeatedly when describing their generation, reflecting a heightened awareness of social issues, including representation. A conflict in opinions about social media’s impact on disability representation emerged, with participants recognising the duality of social media. Participants acknowledged its potential for both positive and negative influence. Some examples of negatives being where the wrong issues gain disproportionate attention or where controversial ‘influencers’ are given a platform.

 

However, the study showed the participants’ positive outlook towards the influence of influencers, advocating for the encouragement of disabled influencers as a way of increasing representation, claiming this was an “authentic” and educational way of weaving disability into SMM.

 

More repetition came within the overwhelmingly negative tone set regarding the way that disability was spoken about based on the perception of it on social media. The lack of representation, resulted in language and phrases like “pushed under the rug” (participant 7), “burdens” (participant 4), “taboo topic” (participant 7), “something that should be hidden” (participant 11). 50% of the participants (1,2,3,4,10,11) admitted that they did not count disability as a part of the inclusivity movement, claiming that they had “forgotten” about it, due to its lack of representation on social media and SMM. Interestingly, participant 2 admitted that they “tend to consider race, gender, ethnicity...before disability”.  Another intriguing finding was participants’ ability to mention instances of improved representation in other forms of media, such as sports and children’s television, suggesting the fashion industry’s lag in embracing inclusivity.

 

Notably, most participants appeared to absolve brands of any direct responsibility for barriers in disability representation, attributing such issues to consumer perceptions and online trolls. Many participants directly stated that there “shouldn’t be” any barriers.

 

A common agreement was in the advocacy for disability representation in fast fashion brands. Interestingly, many participants suggested primarily shifting focus away from the visual representation on social media and instead working on educating their internal teams as a way to combat the tokenistic SMM that has been highlighted throughout this study.

 

In conclusion, this study demonstrates a complex tapestry of beliefs, attitudes, and issues regarding the depiction of people with disabilities in the fast fashion business, highlighting the necessity of a more inclusive and proactive strategy.

 

5: Findings

 

This chapter outlines a comprehensive discussion and analysis of the phenomenological interview results. The aim is to not only present and interpret these findings but also connect them with existing literature and relevant theory. By doing so, it will contextualise the interview results within the broader discourse of consumer behaviour, generational values and the role of representation in contemporary fashion and marketing. Two themes will be discussed deeper within this chapter.

 

As previously discussed, there is a glaringly negative perception of UK DTC fast fashion brands’ disability inclusive SMM efforts, indicating that as a whole, the mass market sector is lacking in this field. The researcher had anticipated this result, having previously discovered a similar lack of existing literature and found that this aligned with the opinion of many authors, writers and journalists, not just within fashion but in further fields too. It was also made clear through personal inspection of UK DTC fast fashion brands’ social media accounts prior to the study, hence identifying the need for focus on this topic. These results build on the CCT which highlights that a lack of disability representation within the media may lead to exclusion and misperception of those who have disabilities. Waqas, Hamzah and Salleh’s (2020) results correspond with this too.

 

This study showed similar patterns, with half of participants stating that they did not consider disability as a part of inclusivity as they had “forgotten about it” (participant 4) and later agreed that the lack of online representation was a factor in this. Participant 2 stated that she considered “race, gender, and ethnicity” before disability, all of which are seen more regularly than disability in popular culture and therefore fit with the CCT. Additionally, some participants mentioned that through online consumption and representation, their perception of people with disabilities was that they should be “pitied” (participant 9), they are “[swept] under the rug” (participant 7), “portrayed like burdens” (participant 4) and “something that should be hidden” (participant 11) - an overwhelmingly negative perception which does not correspond with how people with disabilities are perceived in reality and proving that online media does not accurately portray this minority group.

 

One of the pivotal themes that emerged from this study was the tension between convenience and morals, revealing that while consumers often prioritize affordability and accessibility, they are increasingly cognisant of the moral implications of their choices. This contradiction is especially noticeable in the context of disability representation, where participants noted a lack of real-life representations in the fashion sector. Although this lack of representation is a significant factor in shaping Gen Z’s perceptions of these brands: “[I] see the brand in a differently light now” (participant 1), the majority (9/12) of participants confirmed that this lack of representation and misalignment with their personal values would not deter or stop them from purchasing from the brands. This result contradicts existing research. Tran et al. (2022) and Naidu (2018) studies emphasize the importance of maintaining a reputable brand image that aligns with the values and lifestyles of target consumers to uphold consumer loyalty. Furthermore, Vajkai Kovács and Zsóka (2020) also outline that a misalignment in personal and brand morals can cause anti-consumption and brand avoidance. The results of this research contradict all three studies as the majority (9/12) of participants disregard the need for “self-concept and brand-image congruity” (Naidu, 2018), rather favoring the brands’ affordability over accurate representation and value alignment. The results showed that the participants did not universally reject brands that engage in tokenism, which is also incongruent with the expectations based on Social Identity Theory (SIT). SIT pins Gen Z as an inclusivity driven cohort and it was expected that participants would reject brands engaging in tokenism because it contradicts their core values. This research could be considered an anomaly, but at the very least, it provides new insight into the generational cohort’s complexities in consumer behaviour. It also substantiates Özkan’s (2017) research which finds that Gen Z are certainly not homogeneous and reinforces the notion that generalized conclusions should not be drawn because a cohort’s values can differ, hence the brand-value varying in these results.

 

This result provides evidence for the Attitude-Behaviour Gap (Fishbein and Ajzen, 1970), which explains the inconsistency between the consumers’ attitude and behaviour. Many participants outlined that “money” was an external barrier, which is consistent with Lisboa, Vitorino and Antunes (2022) and Düffelmever’s (2012) studies. Interestingly, some felt the need to justify themselves by mentioning that they are a “student” (participant 2) (this era of one’s life is usually spent without a form of income) or without enough money to be “picky” (participant 6), alluding to a sense of guilt in their consumer behaviour and therefore acknowledging the clash with their Social Identity.

 

It is also important to mention that this result could have been impacted by the participants’ lack of knowledge of brand values: “I wouldn’t say I am aware of brand values” (participant 12) and their assumption that brand values “will never be anything [they] majorly disagree with” (participant 4). Additionally, disability representation may not be a core value to the participants who said they would not be deterred by lack of representation. Another important factor to note is that the participants’ who would be deterred from purchasing also mentioned that they were either related to/know someone who has some form of disability, or were part of an underrepresented group (woman of colour (participant__, plus sized participant 7) themselves.

 

This result can provide a new insight into the relationship between minority groups and the recognition of lack of representation within other minority groups, through the broader concept of ‘intersectionality’ - a theory relevant to the results and briefly touched upon within the literature review when discussing the inclusivity movement.

 

Coined by Kimberle Crenshaw (1980), the Intersectionality Theory acknowledges that individuals have multiple intersecting identities such as gender, race, sexuality, class and so on, and that these identities can interact in complex ways to create unique experiences of discrimination and privilege.

Participant 7 opened up about their personal experience with “discrimination” (participant 7). Minority individuals like participant 7 are arguably more attuned to issues related to social justice and equity because of past discriminative exposure and are therefore possibly more aware of the lack of representation of certain minority groups (like people with disabilities). Even if said person is not disabled, they may be aware of the importance of representation of people with disabilities based on personal experience, which aligns with the intersectionality framework. This choice in deterrence from brands who fail to exert full representation could be driven by an understanding of how systemic bias and discrimination can affect various marginalised groups differently, based on their own experience with discrimination, and a sense of solidarity may be felt. Having previously felt discrimination, equal representation may be more of a priority value in comparison to those who have “never really experienced being a minority” (participant 4), hence the deterrence from brands who fail to exert equal disability representation.

 

It is important to recognise the limitations of this study despite the fact that it provides insightful information about Gen Z’s consumer behaviour. Firstly, the study's sample size was somewhat small, which would restrict how broadly the results can be applied to the entire Gen Z population. Secondly, convenience sampling, which mostly uses social media and personal networks, could introduce bias and reduce the sample's representativeness. Lastly, the study used self-reported information that might have caused the participants to provide answers biased towards social desirability.

 

Future research may use a number of approaches to address these restrictions and advance this topic. First, more diverse samples and larger-scale investigations would improve the generalisability of the application of results. A more thorough insight of Gen Z consumer behaviour might be obtained by using mixed-methods approaches, such as fusing interviews with observational or behavioural data. Studies that examine the evolution of attitudes and behaviours across time may be able to shed light on generational shifts and trends. Furthermore, cross-cultural research investigating how people see people with disabilities in various cultural situations would add to the understanding of this phenomenon. Further investigation into the impact that influencers have on Gen Z consumers’ perceptions could offer practical insights for marketers, as well as deeper examination of the strategies employed by brands to enhance disability representation in their SMM.

 

 

6: Conclusion

 

This research study has undertaken a comprehensive exploration into Gen Z’s consumer behaviour, investigating their behaviours, attitudes, and perceptions in the context of disability representation in UK DTC fast fashion brands’ SMM. Through primary and secondary research, this study has uncovered information which exposes the intricate interactions in the digital age between consumer values, brand reputation, identity, and societal awareness. As this research concludes, there are several key takeaways which have profound implications for both academia and the fast fashion industry.

The premise of this study was to understand the complexities of Gen Z consumers' behaviour. It is clear that the consumer preferences of this age cannot be limited to conventional models or overly broad generalisations. Gen Z's purchase choices are instead the result of a complex web of variables. These factors interact with one another in many unpredicted ways, including affordability, accessibility, personal values, and external barriers. Gen Z's consumer behaviour essentially reflects the challenges of the digital age, in which people must negotiate a quickly changing landscape of options and influences.

 

The stark lack of disability representation in the fast fashion business, both in terms of real-life models and SMM advertising, was one of this study's most important findings. Participants from the Gen Z generation frequently noticed this gap and voiced their worries about it. This absence illustrates the larger problem of underrepresented groups being ignored in media and marketing, as well as a wasted chance for brands to interact with socially conscious consumers. It represents the desire for more genuine representation and increased inclusivity in society.

 

Throughout this study, a central conflict between convenience and morality emerged. While realising the ethical implications of their selections, participants frequently gave convenience, price, and accessibility the highest priority when making purchases. This conflict highlights a major obstacle that brands trying to reflect Gen Z's beliefs must overcome.

 

The role of intersectionality was another significant finding from the primary research. Participants who had close personal relationships with people with disabilities or who identified as members of underrepresented groups were more likely to express concerns about making a purchase from companies with inadequate disability representation. This occurrence underlines how crucial it is to understand how different identities and discrimination experiences interact. It highlights the importance of intersectionality in comprehending Gen Z consumers and reveals a sense of solidarity and empathy that affects consumer choices.

 

The results of this study have broad repercussions. The report is a call to action for the fast fashion sector to increase disability representation in advertising efforts, throughout their apps and websites as well as social media accounts. Gen Z consumers, who are becoming more ethically aware, may be drawn to brands that prioritise diversity and authenticity in their SMM campaigns.

 

This study emphasises the necessity for a complex understanding of modern consumer behaviour in academia. It challlenges established theories and urges the inclusion of numerous variables in the research of customer preferences. The dynamic interaction between identity, social awareness, and consumer behaviour is also highlighted in this study, opening up a wide field for further investigation.

 

It is clear from this study’s conclusion that research on Gen Z consumer behaviour is an ongoing and ever evolving process. The way people connect with brands, make decisions, and express their values has changed significantly in the digital age. Understanding Gen Z's complex connection with disability representation in this setting is just one aspect of a vast and constantly changing terrain.

This study has shed important light on Gen Z consumers' interactions with fast fashion SMM in the context of disability representation. It has shown how difficult it is to categorise Gen Z's consumer behaviour and how it defies accepted wisdom. Further study will be necessary to negotiate the altering consumer behaviour landscape in the digital era as we move forward. There are undoubtedly many more chapters to be examined in the tale of Gen Z customers and their interactions with brands.