Evaluation of Facial Aesthetics In Young-Adult Turkish Society

Year 2024, Volume: 41 Issue: 1, 25 - 34, 03.01.2024

İrem Yolcu , Orhan Çiçek , Nurhat Özkalaycı

https://doi.org/10.17214/gaziaot.1242198

Cited By: 1

Abstract

OBJECTIVE: In the study; it is aimed to obtain soft tissue parameters of young adult individuals, which are liked by the society, instead of the concept of normal used in the orthodontic literature, which can help diagnosis and treatment planning.
MATERIALS AND METHOD: In the study; profile and frontal photographs of 88 women and 61 men, aged between 20-31, who had no facial asymmetry and no trauma history, were used. Profile and frontal photographs of the participants were turned into a survey via Google forms; it was presented to the panel that included 4 orthodontists, 4 dentists, 4 plastic surgeons, 4 architects and 4 non-professional individuals. Panelists were asked to rate the photographs on a scale of 1-10. As a result of scoring; while 13 individuals with 7 points or more formed the attractive group, 13 individuals with 3 points or less formed the unattractive group. Angular measurements, vertical and horizontal distances were measured and compared to each other on 26 individuals. According to the scoring results, male individuals were excluded from the study because the number of males constituting the attractive group was insufficient. Normal distribution of data was evaluated statistically by Shapiro-Wilk test, and inter-group comparison was evaluated using Mann Whitney U-test (p<0.05).
RESULTS: As a result of the frontal analysis; while the ratios of face width to face height, alar wing width to nasal height and bigonial width to mouth width were statistically higher in attractive individuals; the ratio of intercanthal width to facial width was found to be lower (p<0.05). As a result of profile analysis; while total vertical angle, nasal angle, middle and lower facial triad angles were found to be statistically lower in attractive individuals; facial convexity angle was higher (p<0.05).
CONCLUSION: Vertical growth pattern of the face, nasal tip position, facial convexity and harmony in the vertical and transversal ratios of the face are among the factors that determine facial attractiveness in women.

Keywords

Beauty, face, photography, women

Genç-Erişkin Türk Toplumunda Yüz Estetiğinin Değerlendirilmesi

Abstract

AMAÇ: Yapılan çalışmada; teşhis ve tedavi planlamasına yardımcı olabilecek, ortodonti literatüründe faydalanılan normal kavramı yerine, toplum tarafından beğenilen genç erişkin bireylere ait yumuşak doku parametrelerinin elde edilmesi hedeflenmektedir.
GEREÇ VE YÖNTEM: Çalışmada; yüz bölgesinde asimetri ve travma hikayesi olmayan, 20-31 yaş aralığında 88 kadın ve 61 erkeğe ait profil ve cephe fotoğrafları kullanıldı. Katılımcıların profil ve cephe fotoğrafları Google formlar üzerinden anket haline getirilerek; 4 ortodontist, 4 diş hekimi, 4 plastik cerrah, 4 mimar ve 4 meslek dışı bireylerin bulunduğu panele sunuldu. Panelistlerden, fotoğrafları 1-10 arasında puanlamaları istendi. Puanlama sonucuna göre; 7 ve üzeri 13 birey çekici grubu oluştururken, 3 ve altı 13 birey çekici bulunmayan grubu oluşturdu. Çekici bulunan ve bulunmayan gruplardaki 26 bireyin açısal ölçümleri yapıldı, vertikal ve horizontal mesafeler ölçülerek birbirlerine oranlandı. Puanlama sonucuna göre, çekici grubu oluşturan erkek sayısı yetersiz olduğu için erkek bireyler çalışma dışı bırakıldı. Verilerin normal dağılımı Shapiro-Wilk testi ile, gruplar arası karşılaştırma ise Mann Whitney U-testi kullanılarak istatistiksel olarak değerlendirildi (p<0.05).
BULGULAR: Cephe analizi sonucunda; yüz genişliğinin yüz yüksekliğine oranı, alar kanat genişliğinin nazal yüksekliğe oranı ve bigonial genişliğin ağız genişliğine oranı çekici bireylerde istatistiksel olarak daha yüksek bulunurken; interkantal genişliğin yüz genişliğine oranı daha düşük bulunmuştur (p<0.05). Profil analizi sonucunda; total vertikal açı, nazal açı, orta ve alt fasiyal üçlü açıları çekici bireylerde istatistiksel olarak daha düşük bulunurken; fasiyal konveksite açısı daha yüksek bulunmuştur (p<0.05).
SONUÇ: Yüzün vertikal büyüme paterni, burun ucu pozisyonu, yüz konveksitesi ve yüze ait vertikal ve transversal oranlardaki uyum kadınlarda yüz çekiciliğini belirleyen faktörler arasındadır.

Keywords

Fotoğraf, güzellik, kadın, yüz

References

• Erbay EF, Caniklioğlu C. Soft tissue profile in Anatolian Turkish adults: part II. Comparison of different soft tissue analyses in the evaluation of beauty. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2002;121:65–72.
• Dion K, Berscheid E, Walster E. What is beautiful is good. J Pers Soc Psychol 1972;24:285–90.
• Senior C. Beauty in the brain of the beholder. Neuron 2003;38:525–8.
• Trulsson U, Strandmark M, Mohlin B, Berggren U. A qualitative study of teenagers’ decisions to undergo orthodontic treatment with fixed appliance. J Orthod 2002;29:197-204.
• Matoula S, Pancherz H. Skeletofacial morphology of attractive and nonattractive faces. Angle Orthod 2006;76:204–10.
• Edler R, Agarwal P, Wertheim D, Greenhill D. The use of anthropometric proportion indices in the measurement of facial attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 2006;28:274–81.
• Proffit WR, Henry WF, Sarver DM. Malocclusion and dentofacial deformity in contemporary society. In: Proffit WR, Henry WF, Sarver DM, editors. Contemporary orthodontics. 5th ed. Elsevier Health Sciences; 2014. p. 4-5.
• Fernández‐Riveiro P, Smyth‐Chamosa E, Suárez‐Quintanilla D, Suárez‐Cunqueiro M. Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile. Eur J Orthod 2003;25:393-9.
• Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953;39:729-55.
• Downs WB. Analysis of the dentofacial profile. Angle Orthod 1956;26:191-212.
• Ricketts RM. Esthetics, environment, and the law of lip relation. Am J Orthod 1968;54:272-89.
• Spyropoulos MN, Halazonetis DJ. Significance of the soft tissue profile on facial esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofac Orthop 2001;119:464-71.
• Sforza C, Laino A, D’Alessio R, Dellavia C, Grandi G, Ferrario VF. Three-dimensional facial morphometry of attractive children and normal children in the deciduous and early mixed dentition. Angle Orthod 2007;77:1025–33.
• Turan Özdemir S, Sığırlı D, Ercan I, Şimşek Cankur N. Photographic facial soft tissue analysis of healthy Turkish young adults: anthropometric measurements. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2009;33:175–84.
• Choe KS, Sclafani AP, Litner JA, Yu GP, Romo T 3rd. The Korean American woman’s face. Arch Facial Plast Surg 2004;6:244-52.
• Kadhom ZM, Jumaa N. Natural head position: a review. J Baghdad Coll Dent 2020;32:19-22.
• Malkoç S, Demir A, Uysal T, Canbuldu N. Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile of Turkish adults. Eur J Orthod 2009;31:174–9.
• Morosini IDAC, Peron APLM, Correia KR, Moresca R. Study of face pleasantness using facial analysis in standardized frontal photographs. Dental Press J Orthod 2012;17:24–34.
• Tatarunaite E, Playle R, Hood K, Shaw W, Richmond S. Facial attractiveness: a longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 2005;127:676–82.
• Park HS, Rhee SC, Kang SR, Lee JH. Harmonized profiloplasty using balanced angular profile analysis. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2004;28:89-97.
• Bashour M. History and current concepts in the analysis of facial attractiveness. Plast Reconstr Surg 2006;118:741–56.
• Subtelny JD. A longitudinal study of soft tissue facial structures and their profile characteristics, defined in relation to underlying skeletal structures. Am J Orthod 1959;45:481–507.
• Riedel RA. An analysis of dentofacial relationships. Am J Orthod 1957;43:103-19.
• Kiekens RMA, Maltha JC, Van ’t Hof MA, Kuijpers-Jagtman AM. A measuring system for facial aesthetics in Caucasian adolescents: reproducibility and validity. Eur J Orthod 2005;27:579–84.
• Nourian A, Hemmati F, Motamed N, Farzan A. Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile and sexual dimorphism in young adults in Zanjan. J Iran Dent Assoc 2020;32:59-66.
• Kale-Varlık S. Angular photogrammetric analysis of the soft tissue facial profile of Anatolian Turkish adults. J Craniofac Surg 2008;19:1481–6.
• Giddon DB, Sconzo R, Kinchen JA, Evans CA. Quantitative comparison of computerized discrete and animated profile preferences. Angle Orthod 1996;66:441–8.
• Johnston DJ, Hunt O, Johnston CD, Burden DJ, Stevenson M, Hepper P. The influence of lower face vertical proportion on facial attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 2005;27:349–54.
• Howells DJ, Shaw WC. The validity and reliability of ratings of dental and facial attractiveness for epidemiologic use. Am J Orthod 1985;88:402–8.
• Cross JF, Cross J. Age, sex, race, and the perception of facial beauty. Dev Psychol 1971;5:433–9.
• Nanda RS, Ghosh J, Bazakidou E. Three-dimensional facial analysis using a video imaging system. Angle Orthod 1996;66:181–8.
• Türkkahraman H, Gökalp H. Facial profile preferences among various layers of Turkish population. Angle Orthod 2004;74:640–7.
• Park CW, Lee MJ, Jung YI. Photogrammetric facial analysis of attractive celebrities using the glabella for planning rhinoplasty and analyzing surgical outcomes. Arch Aesthetic Plast Surg 2018;24:105-10.
• Jamilian A, Darnahal A, Hamedi R, Kamali Z, Toopchi S. Photogrammetric analysis of facial profile in Persian adults. Gen Dent 2016;64:52-5.
• Anic-Miloševic S, Lapter-Varga M, Šlaj M. Analysis of the soft tissue facial profile by means of angular measurements. Eur J Orthod 2008;30:135–40.
• Moshkelgosha V, Fathinejad S, Pakizeh Z, Shamsa G, Golkari A. Photographic facial soft tissue analysis by means of linear and angular measurements in an adolescent persian population. Open Dent J 2015;9:346-56.
• Gündüz Arslan S, Genç C, Odabaş B, Devecioğlu Kama J. Comparison of facial proportions and anthropometric norms among Turkish young adults with different face types. Aesthetic Plast Surg 2008;32:234–42.
• Malkoç S, Fidancıoğlu A. The role of ideal angles, ratios, and divine proportions in aesthetic evaluation of adolescents. Aesth Plast Surg 2016;40:1-12.
• Asghari A, Rajaeih S, Hassannia F, Tavakolifard N, Neisyani HF, Kamrava SK, et al. Photographic facial soft tissue analysis of healthy Iranian young adults: anthropometric and angular measurements. Med J Islam Repub Iran 2014;28:1-8.
• Mommaerts MY, Moerenhout BAMML. Ideal proportions in full face front view, contemporary versus antique. J Cranio-Maxillofacial Surg 2011;39:107–10.