Rating of facial attractiveness

Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology - Tập 20 Số 4 - Trang 214-220 - 1992
Ceib Phillips1, C Tulloch2, C Dann2
1Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill 27514.
2Department of Orthodontics, School of Dentistry, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA

Tóm tắt

AbstractEpidemiologic investigations of orthodontic treatment should include both objective clinical measures and elements of perceptual assessment in the definition of malocclusion and skeletal disproportion. The effect of dental training and the view of the face presented as a stimulus on judgments of facial attractiveness were evaluated using a method recommended by Howells & Shaw (1) for epidemiologic surveys. Three views (two full face and one profile) of 18 orthodontic patients were presented as stimuli to three panels of judges with different levels of dental training (16 orthodontic residents, 17 dental students, and 71 undergraduate students). Ratings for facial attractiveness were obtained using a visual analog scale. The visual analog scores given the series of 54 slides by each judge were then ranked to create a “location‐free” outcome measure. Both the ratings and the rankings of these ratings differed significantly among the three views for 80% of the patients. However, no view was consistently rated or ranked as most attractive across all patients. The ordering of the views from least to most attractive for a given patient appears to be highly dependent on the patient being presented as stimulus. Future studies should consider showing multiple views of a subject simultaneously if the intent is to obtain an overall treatment need score that incorporates assessment of facial attractiveness. The patients were consistently rated as more attractive by the orthodontic residents than by either dental or undergraduate students. When the ranks were analyzed, there were significant differences between the panels but the consistent pattern of differences between the panels disappeared. However, the differences between panels observed for the rank scores suggests a panel by patient interaction, i.e., the panels had different “preferences” which were reflected in their ranking of patients. Although the visual analog scale is a convenient and rapid method of obtaining value judgments, the actual score recorded on the scale may be affected by the dental training of the judge. Therefore, it is recommended for surveys employing raters of varying backgrounds that a ranking procedure rather than the raw visual analog scores should be used.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1016/0002-9416(85)90067-3

10.1177/00220345810600090501

10.1016/0278-2391(82)90046-5

Jacobsen A, 1984, Psychological aspects of dentofacial esthetics and orthognathic surgery, Angle Orthod, 54, 18

Draker HL, 1960, Handicapping labio‐lingual deviations: a proposed index for public health purposes, Am J Orthod, 39, 193

GraingerRM.Orthodontic treatment priority index. Series 2 No. 25. Washington U.S. National Center for Health Statistics.1967.

10.1016/0002-9416(68)90065-1

10.1016/0002-9416(71)90002-9

10.1111/j.1600-0528.1980.tb01322.x

10.1016/0002-9416(83)90269-5

10.1093/ejo/9.1.314

Sas Institute Inc., 1985, SAS User's Guide: Statistics. Version 5 Edition

Aitken RCB, 1969, Measurement of feelings using visual analogue scales, Proc Roy Soc Med, 62, 17

10.2307/2683975

GlassL.The effects of cosmetic appearance and speech on patients with orofacial anomalies.Ph.D. Thesis. University of Minnesota.1978.

10.1016/0002-9416(83)90270-1

10.14219/jada.archive.1979.0456

Peck H, 1970, A concept of facial esthetics, Angle Orthod, 40, 284

10.1016/0002-9416(81)90382-1

10.1016/0002-9416(85)90198-8

Thông tin
Thông tin xuất bản

Community Dentistry and Oral Epidemiology

Tập 20 Số 4

214-220

Thông tin tác giả