Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery

  • Volume 40
  • /
  • Pages.20.1-20.10
  • /
  • 2018
  • /
  • 2288-8101(pISSN)
  • /
  • 2288-8586(eISSN)
Korean Association of Maxillofacial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgeons (대한악안면성형재건외과학회)
권호 표지
DOI QR코드

DOI QR Code

Proportions of the aesthetic African-Caribbean face: idealized ratios, comparison with the golden proportion and perceptions of attractiveness

  • Mantelakis, Angelos (London and South East Foundation School) ;
  • Iosifidis, Michalis (St George's University of London) ;
  • Al-Bitar, Zaid B. (Department of Orthodontics and Pediatric Dentistry, School of Dentistry, University of Jordan) ;
  • Antoniadis, Vyron (Bloomberg LP) ;
  • Wertheim, David (Faculty of Science, Engineering and Computing, Kingston University) ;
  • Garagiola, Umberto (Maxillofacial and Odontostomatology Unit, School of Dentistry, University of Milan) ;
  • Naini, Farhad B. (Kingston and St George's Hospitals and St George's Medical School)
  • Received : 2018.07.09
  • Accepted : 2018.07.25
  • Published : 2018.12.31
Download PDF
⟨ Previous Next ⟩

Abstract

Background: In the absence of clear guidelines for facial aesthetic surgery, most surgeons rely on expert intuitive judgement when planning aesthetic and reconstructive surgery. One of the most famous theories regarding "ideal" facial proportions is that of the golden proportion. However, there are conflicting opinions as to whether it can be used to assess facial attractiveness. The aim of this investigation was to assess facial ratios of professional black models and to compare the ratios with the golden proportion. Methods: Forty photographs of male and female professional black models were collected. Observers were asked to assign a score from 1 to 10 (1 = not very attractive, 10 = very attractive). A total of 287 responses were analysed for grading behaviour according to various demographic factors by two groups of observers. The best graded photographs were compared with the least well-graded photographs to identify any differences in their facial ratios. The models' facial ratios were calculated and compared with the golden proportion. Results: Differences in grading behaviour were observed amongst the two assessment groups. Only one out of the 12 facial ratios was not significantly different from the golden proportion. Conclusions: Only one facial ratio was observed to be similar to the golden proportion in professional model facial photographs. No correlation was found between facial ratios in professional black models with the golden proportion. It is proposed that an individualistic treatment for each ratio is a rather better method to guide future practice.

Keywords

References

  1. Berscheid E, Dion K, Walster E, Walster GW (1971) Physical attractiveness and dating choice: a test of the matching hypothesis. J Exp Social Psychol 7:173-189 https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-1031(71)90065-5
  2. Naini FB (2011) Facial aesthetics: concepts and clinical diagnosis. Wiley-Blackwell, Oxford
  3. Meisner G (2012) History of the Golden Ratio. https://www.goldennumber. net/golden-ratio-history/. Accessed 20 Dec 2016
  4. Ricketts RM (1982) Divine proportion in facial esthetics. Clin Plast Surg 9:401-422 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0094-1298(20)31936-2
  5. Pancherz H, Knapp V, Erbe C, Heiss AM (2010) Divine proportions in attractive and nonattractive faces. World J Orthod 11:27-36
  6. Medici FE, Martins MV, dos Santos da Silva MA, Castilho JC, de Moraes LC, Gil CT (2007) Divine proportions and facial esthetics after manipulation of frontal photographs. World J Orthod 8:103-108
  7. Marquardt Beauty Analysis (2014) Repose Frontal Mask Application. http://www.beautyanalysis.com/beauty-and-you/you-and-the-mask/repose-frontal-mask-application/. Accessed 20 Dec 2016
  8. Moss JP, Linney AD, Lowey MN (1995) The use of three-dimensional techniques in facial aesthetics. Semin Orthod 1:94-104 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1073-8746(95)80096-4
  9. Baker BW, Woods MG (2001) The role of the divine proportion in the esthetic improvement of patients undergoing combined orthodontic/orthognathic surgical treatment. Int J Adult Orthodont Orthognath Surg 16:108-120
  10. Anand S, Tripathi S, Chopra A, Khaneja K, Agarwal S (2015) Vertical and horizontal proportions of the face and their correlation to phi among Indians in Moradabad population: a survey. J Indian Prosthodont Soc 15:125-130 https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-4052.155033
  11. Intellectual property office (2011) Copyright exceptions for research, education, libraries, museums and archives. Copyright Acts and Related Laws No:1372, July 2011
  12. Langlois JH, Kalakanis L, Rubenstein AJ, Larson A, Hallam M et al (2000) Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychol Bull 126:390-423 https://doi.org/10.1037/0033-2909.126.3.390
  13. Coetzee V, Greeff JM, Stephen ID, Perrett DI (2014) Cross-cultural agreement in facial attractiveness preferences: the role of ethnicity and gender. PloS one. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0099629
  14. Broer PN, Juran S, Liu YJ, Weichman K, Tanna N, Walker ME, Ng R, Persing JA (2014) The impact of geographic, ethnic, and demographic dynamics on the perception of beauty. J Craniofac Surg 25:157-161
  15. Langlois JH, Roggman LA, Casey RJ, Ritter JM, Rieser-Danner LA, Jenkins VY (1987) Infant preferences for attractive faces: rudiments of a stereotype? Dev Psychol 23:363 https://doi.org/10.1037/0012-1649.23.3.363
  16. Samuels CA, Ewy R (1985) Aesthetic perception of faces during infancy. Br J Dev Psychol 3:221-228 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.2044-835X.1985.tb00975.x
  17. Kolb B, Wilson B, Taylor L (1992) Developmental changes in the recognition and comprehension of facial expression: implications for frontal lobe function. Brain Cogn 20:74-84 https://doi.org/10.1016/0278-2626(92)90062-Q
  18. Kissler J, Bauml KH (2000) Effects of the beholder's age on the perception of facial attractiveness. Acta Psychol 104:145-166 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(00)00018-4
  19. Luce RD (2005) Individual choice behavior: a theoretical analysis, dover publications Inc. Courier Corporation, New York
  20. Thurstone LL (1927) The method of paired comparisons for social values. J Abnorm Soc Psychol 21:384-400 https://doi.org/10.1037/h0065439
  21. Suppes P, Krantz DH, Luce RD, Tversky A (1989) Foundations of measurement volume II: geometrical, threshold, and probabilistic representations. Dover Publications Inc., New York
  22. Bauml KH, Schnelzer M, Zimmer A (1997) The influence of inversion on the judgment of facial and non-facial attributes. Acta Psychol 96:27-42 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0001-6918(97)00003-6
  23. Meerdink JE, Garbin CP, Leger DW (1990) Cross-gender perceptions of facial attributes and their relation to attractiveness: do we see them differently than they see us? Percept Psychophys 48:227-233 https://doi.org/10.3758/BF03211522
  24. Rhodes G, Tremewan T (1996) Averageness, exaggeration, and facial attractiveness. Psychol Sci 7:105-110 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9280.1996.tb00338.x
  25. Milutinovic J, Zelic K, Nedeljkovic N (2014) Evaluation of facial beauty using anthropometric proportions. Sci World J. https://doi.org/10.1155/2014/428250
  26. Rhodes G (2006) The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Ann Rev Psychol 57:199-226 https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208
  27. Kendra S, David M, Ashok S (2008) Computation of a face attractiveness index based on neoclassical canons, symmetry, and golden ratios CSE journal articles. Pattern Recogn 41:2710-2717 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2007.11.022
  28. Sforza C, Laino A, D'Alessio R, Grandi G, Binelli M, Ferrario VF (2009) Softtissue facial characteristics of attractive Italian women as compared to normal women. Angle Orthod 79:17-23 https://doi.org/10.2319/122707-605.1
  29. Borelli C, Berneburg M (2010) Beauty lies in the eye of the beholder? Aspects of beauty and attractiveness. J Dtsch Dermatol Ges 8:326-330 https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1610-0387.2009.07318_supp.x
  30. Peron APLM, Morosini IC, Correia KR, Moresca R, Petrelli E (2012) Photometric study of divine proportion and its correlation with facial attractiveness. Dental Press J Orthod 17:124-131 https://doi.org/10.1590/S2176-94512012000200022
  31. Rossetti A, De Menezes M, Rosati R, Ferrario VF, Sforza C (2013) The role of the golden proportion in the evaluation of facial esthetics. Angle Orthod 83:801-808 https://doi.org/10.2319/111812-883.1
  32. Bashour M (2006) An objective system for measuring facial attractiveness. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:757-774 https://doi.org/10.1097/01.prs.0000207382.60636.1c
  33. Marquardt SR (2002) Dr. Stephen R. Marquardt on the golden decagon and human facial beauty. Interview by Dr. Gottlieb. J Clin Orthod 36:339-347
  34. Holland E (2008) Marquardt's phi mask: pitfalls of relying on fashion models and the golden ratio to describe a beautiful face. Aesthet Plast Surg 32:200-208 https://doi.org/10.1007/s00266-007-9080-z
  35. Pallett PM, Link S, Lee K (2010) New "golden" ratios for facial beauty. Vis Res 50:149-154 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.visres.2009.11.003

Cited by

  1. Classification of the journal category "oral surgery" in the Scopus and the Science Citation Index Expanded: flaws and suggestions vol.45, pp.4, 2018, https://doi.org/10.5125/jkaoms.2019.45.4.186