Shoemakers, take note: US14 more common than either 13 or 10!

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

Here is a graph from Dr. Karen J Mickle, health scientist at the University of Newcastle in Australia.

In a university study of people aged 60+ published in the Journal of Footwear Science, four scientists, Mickle and 4 other scientists (one of whom currently works in Research for Nike), using exact Brannock device measurements, showed that shoemakers who stop at US13 are cutting themselves off from a massive market.

By this study, economically, they would do better eliminating sizes 10 or 13 than size 14.

Which is why the big brands like Nike or Allen Edmonds or Cole Haan or Crockett & Jones wouldn't dream of neglecting that segment.

Here is a link to the study at researchgate.net.

Figure 3. Distribution of shoe sizes for men ( n 1⁄4 158) and women ( n...

Download scientific diagram | Distribution of shoe sizes for men ( n 1⁄4 158) and women ( n 1⁄4 154). from publication: Foot shape of older people: Implications for shoe design | Foot problems and deformities, which are highly prevalent in older people, may affect foot anthropometrics and...

www.researchgate.net

 

[breakaway01]

Did you actually read the article?
I thought it was curious that the smallest men’s size was 8.5D since that is not really all that small.
Not “large scale” at all: 158 men
Study aimed to look only in older adults so all were over age 60 (mean age 71)
I didn’t see anything about Nike funding the study? Might have missed that one.
So maybe a little hard to generalize that graph to the general population.

 

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

I didn’t see anything about Nike funding the study? Might have missed that one.

Dr. Bridget Munro from Nike Sports Research Lab is even listed as one of the authors of the study.

 

[breakaway01]

Dr. Bridget Munro from Nike Sports Research Lab is even listed as one of the authors of the study.

Again, did you read the study? The author affiliations don’t mention Nike and I didn’t see a declaration of funding from Nike. It would be poor academic practice (actually unethical) for them to not list Nike if they had provided support.

she may work for Nike now but doesn’t look like she did back in 2010 when this paper was published.

Karen Julie Micklea*, Bridget J. Munroa, Stephen R. Lordb, Hylton B. Menzc and Julie R. Steelea
aSchool of Health Sciences, University of Wollongong, Wollongong, Australia; bPrince of Wales Medical Research Institute, University of New South Wales, Randwick 2031, Australia; cMusculoskeletal Research Centre, Faculty of Health Sciences, La Trobe University, Bundoora 3086, Australia

 

[Noblekostas]

what a load of rubbish 🤣🤣🤣🤣 in 3600 shoe sales I only had one size 14 customer 🤣🤣🤣 and US 10 is one of my most popular sizes 🤣🤣🤣🤣 these are the types of researches that show that Scandinavian countries are the happiest on earth

 

[Phileas Fogg]

The bulk of the mens brannock sizes fell between 10-12.

Also, these were older adults. The older population was specifically chosen because for the purpose of this study. In general, an older population would also skew toward people who are no longer working and have little to no use for business formal footwear. This is a gross generalization but when we expand these findings beyond the borders of Australia, which any scientist would tell you in itself to be cautious of, we have to take such things into consideration.

Allen Edmonds makes shoes up to size 16, so I don’t know what you’re talking about. I have no clue as to Cole Haan.

Crockett & Jones is a boutique operation compared to the other two. They’re not churning tens of thousands of pairs of shoes a year. Some of their shoes are offered in UK size 12 which is for all intents and purposes a US 13.

The purpose of the study was not to urge shoemakers to make more shoes in size 14+. It was to quantify changes in foot structure as people get older. Missing from the study is a the dynamic component; a study of gait in the same population.

it’s an error to read additional context into a very narrow, purpose designed study like this.

 

[breakaway01]

I know this is definitely getting OT but ... as an academic researcher myself, on the one hand I think it is good and important that primary scientific research papers are becoming more accessible to the public. In fact, the US National Institutes of Health has required for years that any NIH-funded research become publicly available for download within a year of publication. On the other hand, though, most laypeople don't really know how to read these papers, and often times the conclusions of these papers are quoted without being put in the proper context. Nothing personal to the OP. It's been amplified during COVID and of course communication about the results of shoe studies is not likely to impact public health, but you can see how communication about genuinely important stuff ends up being distorted in much the same way.

Just two words of advice: (1) if you're going to quote a research study, take a couple of minutes to actually look at the article itself. (2) most people don't have the training to evaluate study design and methodology, which is of course understandable, but most people are able to understand who the study population is (in this case, Australian community-living adults over the age of 60). Based on the study population, it is important to ask yourself about the generalizability of the results. That is, how well can we apply the results of studying elderly people in Australia to the general population in the rest of the world?

 

[FlyingMonkey]

Based on the study population, it is important to ask yourself about the generalizability of the results. That is, how well can we apply the results of studying elderly people in Australia to the general population in the rest of the world?

As another academic researcher and one who has served on research ethics committees for years, I agree, but I also wish some academics would ask themselves the same questions, particularly psychology and marketing researchers, who seem to think that studies conducted on 18-22 year-old predominantly white, middle-class students who are being paid in course credits, are generalizable to the entire human race... (I exaggerate only slightly).

 

[Proleet]

Shoe length like pretty much all of these things will follow a normal distribution with the mid point probably sitting around size 9 or 10….laughable to quote a skewed small scale (yes really) study to prove otherwise…

 

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

The bulk of the mens brannock sizes fell between 10-12.

Also, these were older adults. The older population was specifically chosen because for the purpose of this study. In general, an older population would also skew toward people who are no longer working and have little to no use for business formal footwear. This is a gross generalization but when we expand these findings beyond the borders of Australia, which any scientist would tell you in itself to be cautious of, we have to take such things into consideration.

Allen Edmonds makes shoes up to size 16, so I don’t know what you’re talking about. I have no clue as to Cole Haan.

Crockett & Jones is a boutique operation compared to the other two. They’re not churning tens of thousands of pairs of shoes a year. Some of their shoes are offered in UK size 12 which is for all intents and purposes a US 13.

The purpose of the study was not to urge shoemakers to make more shoes in size 14+. It was to quantify changes in foot structure as people get older. Missing from the study is a the dynamic component; a study of gait in the same population.

it’s an error to read additional context into a very narrow, purpose designed study like this.

You do like to pontificate, don't you? Why don't you read a little more carefully before complaining about what you think you read. What I said was: the big brands do NOT cut themselves off from this important markets, so smaller brands should perhaps take note and also offer these sizes.

As for the idea that older people no longer need formal footwear – that I think is just strange. I don't know what kind of people you associate with, but I haven't found retirees who liked the good shoemakers suddenly switch to Rockport and Cole Haan simply because the nice shoes are no longer needed for a promotion.

 

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

what a load of rubbish 🤣🤣🤣🤣 in 3600 shoe sales I only had one size 14 customer 🤣🤣🤣 and US 10 is one of my most popular sizes 🤣🤣🤣🤣 these are the types of researches that show that Scandinavian countries are the happiest on earth

Most people with a size 14 will not even try to buy in stores anymore, so you would not encounter them.
(and Denmark is a pretty happy country, indeed!)

 

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

Shoe length like pretty much all of these things will follow a normal distribution with the mid point probably sitting around size 9 or 10….laughable to quote a skewed small scale (yes really) study to prove otherwise…

The study, done by respected scientists at respected institutions, shows what it shows. It's doesn't claim to be a cross section of the entire population. The size or the sample is in the graph for all to see. To dispute what it shows is laughable. In addition to not understanding this, you have no manners – pretty funny on a board about gentleman style. Maybe you should look for an anger management board instead of one about how to dress like a gentleman.

 

[FlyingMonkey]

The problem is that you didn't read the research properly before starting yet another thread. Perhaps a bit more reading and starting somewhat fewer threads might be a good idea?

 

[breakaway01]

The study, done by respected scientists at respected institutions, shows what it shows. It's doesn't claim to be a cross section of the entire population. The size or the sample is in the graph for all to see. To dispute what it shows is laughable. In addition to not understanding this, you have no manners – pretty funny on a board about gentleman style. Maybe you should look for an anger management board instead of one about how to dress like a gentleman.

I wasn't going to get into the data too far but since you are being very stubborn:

1. the title of your thread is "US14 more common than either 13 or 10" and you further write "By this study, economically, they would do better eliminating sizes 10 or 13 than size 14." Aren't you clearly implying by these statements that you think this should apply to the general population? First of all, does this pass the smell test? Is it likely that size 14 is actually more common than size 13 or 10 in the general population? I don't think most people would think that, so now we have to look at the data more carefully.

2. Looking at the plot, I noticed two things. First, the smallest size recorded is 8.5. That's odd too, don't you think? Second, the sample size is fairly small, so there is understandably more statistical variance. For example, they only have about 12 or 13 men with size 14 feet.

3. Then when you actually read the paper (there I go again, suggesting that you actually read the paper), "fourteen percent of the participants reported that they suffered from swollen feet", so at least some of the larger recorded foot sizes are due to this issue.

If you REALLY want more accurate data on the distribution of foot sizes in the general population, how about this study of 1.2 million foot scans from N. America, Europe, and Asia collected in a retail environment (though unfortunately no age data so that is an important limitation).

eyeballing the plot, the mean adult male foot length in EU/NA is about 270 mm, which is about US 10. So I think it would be a terrible idea to stop making size 10 shoes. US14 is about 305 mm, and you can see for yourself how common that is. Admittedly men with very large feet might not be shopping for shoes in retail stores as you pointed out, but it is very, very unlikely based on the shape of the plot that the true number of men with size 14 feet is anywhere close to the number of men with size 10 feet.

Finally I think it is really ironic that you disparage Chelsea boots because you think they were made for old people with swollen feet, and here you go quoting a study on old people with swollen feet.

 

[Monsieur de Givenchy]

what a load of rubbish 🤣🤣🤣🤣 in 3600 shoe sales I only had one size 14 customer 🤣🤣🤣 and US 10 is one of my most popular sizes 🤣🤣🤣🤣 these are the types of researches that show that Scandinavian countries are the happiest on earth

Here's another probable Nobelcostas quote: "And I'm also really glad I didn't have that wheelchair ramp installed in my store, like those annoying inclusivity people wanted me to. The vast majority of my customers were perfectly capable of walking up those stairs."

What this study might help to show is that there might even be an economic incentive to do what shoemakers should do anyway out of general regard for minorities. The tone of these tweets is extremely discriminatory against people with big shoe sizes.