and clothing. Researchers were also careful to ensure that each person only saw one of the photographs so that the aim

of the study was not revealed, and therefore participants were not influenced by this.

Approachability The trainer was rated as significantly more approachable displaying positive body language as when displaying negative body language; regardless of the clothing she was wearing (Figure 5). Therefore if body language is not positive, clients are likely to see you as less approachable, and this will clearly have an impact on your ability to attract and keep clients. Of particular interest here is that the positive body language with casual clothing led to higher ratings of approachability than negative body language and smart clothing. We can conclude from this that no matter how much you dress up, your body language cues are much more likely to influence clients’ perceptions of how approachable you are. This is supported by the fact that there was no significant difference between the negative smart and negative causal conditions indicating that if you display negative body language, dressing smartly will not make clients view you as any more approachable. Perhaps not surprisingly, positive body language with smart clothing was clearly the winner in this category, whereas negative body language with casual clothing rated lowest.

Personality Findings for personality were consistent with those for approachability (see Figure 6). Personality was rated significantly higher when the trainer was displaying positive body language (regardless of clothing). Positive body language with casual clothing led to higher ratings of personality than negative body language with smart clothing, once again indicating that body language cues are used more by clients to judge your personality than your clothing is, and this was again supported by the fact that there was no difference between the negative smart and negative casual conditions. The trainer was rated highest on personality when showing positive body language and wearing smart clothing, and lowest when body language was negative, and clothing casual.

Competence When it comes to making judgements about a personal trainer’s perceived competence, it appears that clothing cues might be

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Figure 5: Approachability ratings

Positive/smart Negative/smart Positive/casual Negative/casual

8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0

Figure 6: Personality ratings

more important than they were for approachability and personality (figure 7). Perceptions of the trainer’s competence were highest when she was wearing smart clothing, regardless of her body language, and lowest when she was wearing casual clothing. There was no significant difference between the negative/smart and positive/casual condition indicating that, for the first time, smart clothing can overcome negative body language when people are making judgements regarding a trainer’s competence. It therefore appears that wearing appropriate smart clothing could influence clients’ judgements regarding job related factors (e.g.

Positive/smart Negative/smart Positive/casual Negative/casual

20

The REPS Journal 2012;25(September):19-22