Influence of Age on Perception of Best Esthetical Profile

Salehi, Parisa; Azadeh, Niloofar; Beigi, Negin; Farzin, Mitra

doi:10.30476/dentjods.2019.44558

Document Type : Original Article

Authors

¹ Orthodontics Research Center, Dept. of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

² Postgraduate Students, Dept. of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

³ Undergraduate Student, Student research committee, School of dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

⁴ Dept. of Prosthodontic, School of Dentistry, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran.

https://doi.org/10.30476/dentjods.2019.44558

Abstract

Statement of the problem: As an important determinant of social acceptability, facial attractiveness can be influenced by decisions of orthodontists through treatment. Purpose: The purpose of this study was to determine the difference in perception of facial attractiveness among male and female raters in different age groups through comparison of silhouettes.Materials and Method: 208 subjects (99 male, 109 female) aged between 18 to 70 years were assigned to three groups of young adults, middle-aged and senior and rated pre-designed silhouettes on a 7-level rating scale (1= the least esthetic, 7=the most esthetic). Two series of 7 silhouettes were prepared for men and women in which the mandible was protruded or retruded in 2-mm increments from the average. The evaluators were asked to grade the profiles separately for male and female. T-test and one-way ANOVA were used for the statistical analysis with α = 0.05.Results: The first and third age groups, favored female profile 2 among class II profiles. However, the second age group preferred the average profile. Male class II profiles were rated exactly as female ones among the three age groups. The average female class III silhouette was preferred in all age groups. The first and second age group preferred the average male profile in male class III silhouettes. The oldest group however, preferred profile 2. For both sexes, the least acceptable profile in each set of silhouettes was the most protruded or retruded.Conclusion: There were few differences in perception of facial attractiveness between different age groups. In all groups, even small mandibular protrusion was unacceptable and mild retrusion was considered attractive.

Keywords

References

1. Adams GR. Physical attractiveness research: toward a developmental social psychology of beauty. Human Development. 1977; 20:217–239. [Google Scholar]

2. Hershon LE, Giddon DB. Determinants of facial profile self-perception. Am J Orthod. 1980; 78: 279–295. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

3. Feingold A. Good-looking People Are Not What We Think. Psychological Bulletin. 1992; 111:304–341. [Google Scholar]

4. Thompson LA, Malmberg J, Goodell NK, Boring RL. The distribution of attention across a talker's face. Discourse Processes. 2004; 38: 145–168. [Google Scholar]

5. Alley TR. Social and Applied Aspects of Perceiving Faces. 1st ed. New Jersey: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates Publishers; 1988. p. 140. [Google Scholar]

6. Chiappone RC. Special considerations for adult orthodontics. J Clin Orthod. 1976; 10: 535–545. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

7. Jacobsen T. Beauty and the brain: culture, history and individual differences in aesthetic appreciation. J Anat. 2010; 216: 184–191. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

8. Mantzikos T. Esthetic soft tissue profile preferences among the Japanese population. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 1–7. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

9. Hall D, Taylor RW, Jacobson A, Sadowsky PL, Bartolucci A. The perception of optimal profile in African Americans versus white Americans as assessed by orthodontists and the lay public. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118:514–525. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

10. Maganzini AL, Tseng JY, Epstein JZ. Perception of facial esthetics by native Chinese participants by using manipulated digital imagery techniques. Angle Orthod. 2000; 70: 393–399. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

11. Nguyen DD, Turley PK. Changes in the Caucasian male facial profile as depicted in fashion magazines during the twentieth century. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1998; 114: 208–217. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

12. Sutter RE Jr, Turley PK. Soft tissue evaluation of contemporary Caucasian and AfricanAmerican female facial profiles. Angle Orthod. 1998; 68: 487–496. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

13. Hwang HS, Kim WS, McNamara JA Jr. Ethnic differences in the soft tissue profile of Korean and European-American adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. Angle Orthodontist. 2002; 72: 72–80. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

14. Auger TA, Turley PK. The female soft tissue profile as presented in fashion magazinesduring the 1900s: a photographic analysis. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg. 1999; 14: 7–18. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

15. Berneburg M, Dietz K, Niederle C, Göz G. Changes in esthetic standards since 1940. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2010; 137: 450.e1–e9. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

16. Farkas LG, Sohm P, Kolar JC, Katic MJ, Munro IR. Inclinations of the facial profile: art versus reality. Plast Reconstr Surg. 1985; 75: 509–519. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

17. Yehezkel S, Turley PK. Changes in the African American female profile as depicted in fashion magazines during the 20th century. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2004; 125: 407–417. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

18. Türkkahraman H, Gökalp H. Facial profile preferences among various layers of Turkish population. Angle Orthod. 2004; 74: 640–647. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

19. Patel K, Nawathe A, Goje SK, Kulkarni N, Bhalodia C, Purohit Z. Perception of Facial Profiles among Adolescent and Adult Laypersons, A Profile Silhouette Study. Journal of Dentistry and Oral Biosciences. 2012; 3: 1–5. [Google Scholar]

20. Naini FB, Donaldson AN, Cobourne MT, McDonald F. Assessing the influence of mandibular prominence on perceived attractiveness in the orthognathic patient, clinician, and layperson. Eur J Orthod. 2012; 34: 738–746. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

21. Jacobson A, Jacobson RL, editors . Radiographic cephalometry: from basics to 3-D imaging. 2nd ed. Berlin, Germany: Quintessence; 2006. pp. 25–40. [Google Scholar]

22. Langlois JH, Kalakanis L, Rubenstein AJ, Larson A, Hallam M, Smoot M. Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoreticalreview. Psychol Bull. 2000; 126: 390–423. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

23. Coleman GG, Lindauer SJ, Tüfekçi E, Shroff B, Best AM. Influence of chin prominence on esthetic lip profilepreferences. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2007; 132: 36–42. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

24. Morar A. Age-related perceptions of facial profile attractiveness in South Africans. Available at: [https://core.ac.uk/ download/pdf/39667681.pdf. ]

25. Park NS, Park JH, Bayome M, Mo SS, Kim Y, Kook YA. An evaluation of preferred lip positions according to different age groups. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2013; 42: 637–642. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

26. Shimomura T, Ioi H, Nakata S, Counts AL. Evaluation of well-balanced lip position by Japanese orthodonticpatients. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2011; 139: e291–e297. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

27. Polk MS Jr, Farman AG, Yancey JA, Gholston LR, Johnson BE, Regennitter FJ. Soft tissue profile: a survey of African-American preference. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 1995; 108: 90–101. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

28. Hall D, Taylor RW, Jacobson A, Sadowsky PL, Bartolucci A. The perception of optimal profile in African Americans versuswhite Americans as assessed by orthodontists and the laypublic. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 2000; 118: 514–525. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

29. Kissler J, Bäuml KH. Effects of the beholder's age on the perception of facialattractiveness. Acta Psychol (Amst) 2000; 104: 145–166. [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

30. Cross JF, Cross J. Age, sex, race and the perception of facial beauty. Developmental Psychology. 1971; 5:433–439. [Google Scholar]

31. Proffit WR, White RP, Sarver DM. Contemporary treatment of dentofacial deformity. 1st ed. St Louis, Mo: Mosby; 2003. p. 507. [Google Scholar]

32. Sena LMF, Damasceno E, Araújo LAL, Farias ACR, Pereira HSG. The influence of sagittal position of the mandible in facialattractiveness and social perception. Dental Press J Orthod. 2017; 22: 77–86. [PMC free article] [PubMed] [Google Scholar]

Influence of Age on Perception of Best Esthetical Profile

References

References

Volume 20, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1March 2019Pages 16-23

Volume 20, Issue 1 - Serial Number 1
March 2019
Pages 16-23