Assay of Jeans in Household Laundry Supply (2008; Stewart, C.F. & Stewart, S.L., currently in peer r
Abstract: Jeans are a critical resource for local clothing wearers. Inadequate levels of Jeans in the clothing system can cause such symptoms as hypothermia, agoraphobia, embarrassment and even lead to incarceration. This study examines reduced levels of Jeans in a single subject household through a total laundry supply assay, to determine whether these reports are actually caused by a Jeans shortage.
Method: Researchers sorted all household laundry for a complete assay. In order to generate a completely accurate assessment, researchers removed all their own clothing and added it to the assay. Caveat: since one researcher had to go to work, she was exempted, but her clothing total was tallied beforehand and added to the assay. Subjects were both female, in their mid-30s, and college educated at the Bachelor level. Laundry was sorted into several categories: Shirts - Dark, Shirts - Light, Shirts - Without Color, Overshirts/Pajamas/Sweaters, Underwear - Dark, Underwear - Light, Delicates, Bedding and Bath, Jeans - Subject 1, Jeans - Subject 2. The Jeans were then counted.
Results: Figure 1 shows the Jeans found in the total assay. It is self-explanatory. There was a small possibility of error; though the researchers did account for all Jeans in the bedroom by looking under the bed, in the bathroom and the closet, et cetera, the scope of this experiment did not extend to a search of any downstairs rooms for additional Jeans. However, although past research has shown that downstairs rooms are a common location for residues of Overshirts, Sweaters, Socks and certain Delicates, it is rare to find any Jeans residues in these areas.
Subject IDJeans Count1625figure 1
Conclusions: Though the scientific community differs in its opinions on how many pairs of pants an average person needs for a typical week, the consensus, based on prior meta-analysis suggests a range within 3-7, (p > 0.05). The researchers found that the subject household has a number of Jeans per subject well within the mean. It seems safe to conclude that the household does not, in fact, have a physical shortage of Jeans. So how does one explain the reports of low Jeans levels?
Researchers attempted to follow up with specific analyses of the Jeans resulting from the assay, but unfortunately only Subject 1 was available, leading to a somewhat subjective analysis. When asked to evaluate the Jeans, Subject 1 classified two pairs as worn out and in need of repair and two others as “not fitting well,” a measure difficult to empirically quantify. Objectively, the “not fitting well” pairs do share one measurable defect: they ride rather high on the ankle, leading to overexposure of the shoe, ankle and sock. It seems to the researchers that while those pairs of Jeans are still wearable, they could cause some discomfort in cold weather and also cramp the subject’s style to some degree.
Further research is clearly called for into the fitness of wear, damage, comfort, etc. of individual pairs of assayed Jeans as variables in Jeans shortfalls, but it is clear that a report of Jeans deficits should be followed up by careful empirical analysis before treatment is decided on. Our results also suggest that future studies on the availability of other types of clothing, especially in the undergarment, shirt and shoe areas, where historically it has been very difficult to assess an acceptable normative range, may benefit from direct quantitative assays, but that assays alone are unlikely to be sufficient. There may also be gender or age effects which the present experiment’s cohort would not expose. Longitudinal studies, with assays performed across longer periods, could also be revealing.
We look forward to any broader experimentation in this area, since it has long been a topic of great controversy in the fields of laundry triage and relationship counseling.