Cross-cultural design in costume: case study on totemic symbols of China and Thailand

The paper addresses how cross-cultural costume design can effectively communicate cultural meaning across diverse audiences in a globalized context. It frames culture as a multi-level construct (material, institutional, behavioral, mental) and emphasizes semiotics—symbols and symbolic systems—as the lens for understanding cultural communication. The research problem stems from a paucity of fashion design studies that deeply integrate cross-cultural design beyond superficial aesthetics. Using the Chinese loong and Thai naga—visually similar yet culturally distinct totems often confused by younger generations—the study explores how costume can operate as a non-verbal language to encode and decode cultural content. The objectives are to: (1) analyze tangible (visual) and intangible (semantic) cultural attributes of loong and naga and their similarities/differences; (2) investigate audience cognition to determine strategies aligned with communication needs; and (3) propose a structured guidance model for incorporating cultural symbols into costume design to facilitate cross-cultural communication.

The review situates cross-cultural design within global product-service integration and references Steiner and Haas’s Q.M.T. process (Quotation, Metaphor, Transformation) and Hofstede’s cultural dimensions. In fashion, prior studies often emphasize designer-led aesthetic integration (e.g., geometric pattern semiotics; Sino–English cultural mixtures) while lacking empirically grounded user perspectives. Semiotic and communication theories (Peirce’s triadic sign, Saussure, Barthes’s signifier/signified, dual-coding theory) frame clothing as material culture and a multilayered symbol system that communicates both sensory (intuitive) and conceptual (abstract) content. The review posits that totem symbols should be analyzed for explicit decorative features and implicit cognition/knowledge and translated through costume languages (shape, color, pattern, materials) while considering Human–Object–Environment–Society–Culture relationships. Background literature on loong and naga traces their roles as sacred totems embedded in religion, identity, and governance: the loong as a composite, auspicious national emblem and imperial symbol; the naga as snake-based rain/water deity, protector of Buddha, bearer of moral ambivalence, and regional identity tied to the Mekong. Prior comparisons focus largely on Chinese loong vs. Western dragon, indicating a gap in systematic loong–naga comparative study within fashion design.

Design: Mixed-methods research integrating qualitative (literature, fieldwork, participatory research) and quantitative (AHP) approaches to build a cultural knowledge mapping database and derive user-informed design strategies for cross-cultural costume design. Data collection: (1) Basic knowledge collection via literature on tangible features and intangible meanings of loong and naga, and historical China–Thailand cultural exchange; (2) Field research—site visits, observation, and analysis of artworks (architecture, sculpture, textiles, handcrafts, apparel, jewelry) within local contexts. Sites: Thailand (Chiang Mai, Chiang Rai, Sukhothai, Phitsanulok, Udon Thani) and China (Beijing, Fuzhou, Xiamen, Shanghai, Nanjing, Shanxi). Over 800 artworks were analyzed. Findings were summarized into cultural characteristic tables for loong and naga (sacredness, religious associations, national identity, natural phenomena roles, linkage heaven–earth, imperial/spiritual symbolism, artistic manifestations). Participatory research: Stakeholder engagement through unstructured interviews and workshops to mitigate researcher bias and ground strategies in audience cognition. Participants (n=30): 15 Chinese and 15 Thai (fashion design students, lecturers, designers). Data: audio/text; tools included projector, display boards, sketches. Process: introduction; assessment of background knowledge via image-based elicitation; opinions on existing fashion products using loong/naga; co-creation of design strategies and factor selection (with sketching). AHP analysis: Participants conducted pairwise comparisons to prioritize design factors. Steps: build hierarchies, construct judgment matrices, compute weights, and perform consistency checks (CR<0.1 criterion). For a 7th-order matrix, CI=0.051, RI=1.360, CR=0.038 (passed). Weight outputs prioritized tangible and intangible factors and preferred design plans. Design strategy and application: A four-layer, iterative encoding–decoding framework guided practice: (1) Contact/graphic layer (introduce combined loong–naga graphics); (2) Art form application (translate regional artistic practices into fashion—pattern translation, silhouette lines, knit integrations); (3) Multiple semantic layer (embed symbolic meanings—loong: imperial authority, auspiciousness, unity, protection; naga: water/rain, moral ambivalence, guardian); (4) Cultural context layer (national philosophies/values—origin of life, water waves, harmony with nature via four elements—earth, water, fire, air). Designs used material experimentation (e.g., organza/foil/Tyvek hot-pressing, PVC translucency) to embody symbolic content.

• Audience cognition: Thai respondents were more familiar with the Chinese loong than Chinese respondents were with the Thai naga; both groups showed low awareness and occasional confusion. Participants desired designs that go beyond figurative patterns to tell cultural stories, rejuvenated for youth aesthetics, and to present both distinctions and connections between loong and naga.
• AHP tangible priorities: Decoration form (33.00%) > Decoration elements (18.63%) > Body shape (16.43%) > Movements (11.00%) > Body details (8.02%) > Color (7.46%) > Organs (5.45%).
• AHP intangible priorities: National philosophy (33.75%) > Symbol (27.95%) > Beliefs (14.15%) > Spiritual (9.24%) > Myth (7.66%) > Story (7.24%).
• Preferred design plans (selection weights): Combination design of intangible meaning (25.32%) > Contrast design of intangible meaning (17.01%) > Combination design of tangible features (13.96%) > Contrast design of tangible features (10.84%) > Naga intangible (9.03%) > Loong intangible (8.78%) > Naga tangible (7.53%) = Loong tangible (7.53%).
• Frameworks: The study formalized a cyclical encoding–decoding model positioning designers as translators across symbol-meaning-design cycles and proposed a four-layer symbol framework (Contact, Application, Multiple Semantic, Cultural Context) for cross-cultural costume design.
• Design cases: Multi-phase design outputs demonstrated how graphic integration, artistic applications, symbolic embedding, and cultural-context narratives can be materialized via shape, color, pattern, textiles/materials, and texture/technique to communicate complex cultural meanings.

The findings address the central question of how costume can serve as an effective non-verbal medium for cross-cultural communication. Empirical prioritization via AHP indicates that audiences value higher-order cultural content—national philosophies and symbolic systems—over surface-level features, and prefer design strategies that combine intangible meanings. This supports the argument that successful cross-cultural fashion must layer explicit visual cues with deeper semantic content. The encoding–decoding framework positions designers as cultural translators who first decode cultural symbols (tangible and intangible) and then re-encode them using costume languages (shape, color, pattern, materials) for audiences to decode anew, enabling iterative feedback loops. The four-layer model operationalizes a progression from accessible visual contact to cultural-context depth, offering a replicable pathway for integrating cultural symbols into design. Taken together, the methodological integration (fieldwork, participatory research, AHP) and design applications provide a rigorous, user-attuned approach that enhances cultural dissemination and reduces misinterpretation between similar totems (loong vs. naga).

The study demonstrates that a structured, mixed-method research methodology—combining literature and field investigations, participatory engagement, and AHP—can inform cross-cultural costume design that communicates both explicit and implicit cultural meanings. It contributes a dual-coding inspired, multi-level interaction model between cultural content and costume language and formalizes a four-layer framework (Contact, Application, Multiple Semantic, Cultural Context) for symbol interpretation and design transformation. Design practices validated how layered encoding can translate national symbols’ philosophical cores into material form. Future work should deepen theoretical engagement (e.g., Bourdieu, Hall), systematically collect audience feedback on final outputs, and extend design practice into serial product-service systems aligned with aesthetics, function, perception, and value, iterating through multiple encoding–decoding cycles to strengthen cultural understanding.

The discussion of sociological and cultural theory depth is limited relative to specialized scholarship; further incorporation of Bourdieu’s cultural transmission and Hall’s intercultural theory is suggested. The study did not collect systematic audience feedback on final design outputs. Design practices, while multi-phased, were not expanded into broader, serial, or service-oriented ecosystems. Future research should implement iterative user evaluations and diversified, systematic design programs to close the loop of encoding–decoding cycles.