A current look at the factors influencing face variability

Authors

  • Monika Łącka Chair and Clinic of Maxillofacial Orthopaedics and Orthodontics, Facial Aesthetics Laboratory, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0001-9163-3783
  • Teresa Matthews‑Brzozowska Chair and Clinic of Maxillofacial Orthopaedics and Orthodontics, Facial Aesthetics Laboratory, Poznan University of Medical Sciences, Poland https://orcid.org/0000-0002-7127-6018

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.20883/jofa.50

Keywords:

face perception, beauty canons, proportions, gender, race, aging

Abstract

The aesthetic perception of a face is multifactorial. The researchers most often focus on its proportions in terms of historical beauty canons, anthropological intercultural gender and race differences, and a multi‑faceted approach to aging, also at the molecular level. This multifaceted nature is the result of both individual and holistic perception of the phenomenon of beauty, which as a visual aspect is susceptible to optical illusions and cultural definition.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Ahadi S, Zhou W, Schüssler‑Fiorenza Rose SM, Sailani MR, Contrepois K, Avina M, Ashland M, Brunet A, Snyder M. Personal aging markers and ageotypes revealed by deep longitudinal profiling. Nat Med. 2020;26:83–90.

Alam MK, Mohd Noor NF, Basri R, Yew TF, Wen TH. Multiracial Facial Golden Ratio and Evaluation of Facial Appearance. PLOS ONE. 2015.

Atiyeh BS, Hayek SN. Numeric Expression of Aesthetics and Beauty. Aesth Plast Surg. 2008;32:209–216.

Bashour M. History and Current Concepts in the Analysis of Facial Attractiveness. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006:741–754.

Broer PN, Juran S, Liu Y‑J, Weichman K, Tanna N, Walker ME, N?g R, Persing JA. The Impact ofGeographic, Ethnic, and Demographic Dynamics on the Perception of Beauty. J Craniofac Surg & Volume. 2014;25(2):157–161.

Bueller H. Ideal Facial Relationships and Goals. Facial Plast Surg. 2018;34:458–465.

Fang F, Clapham PJ, Chung KC. A Systematic Review of Inter‑ethnic Variability in Facial Dimensions. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2011;127(2):874–881.

Danel DP, Fedurek P Coetxee V, Stephen ID, Nowak N, Stirrat M, Perrett DI, Saxton TK. A Cross‑Cultural Comparison of Population‑Specific Face Shape Preferences (Homo sapiens). Ethology. 2012;118:1173–1181.

Hashim PW, Nia JK, Taliercio M, Goldenberg G. Ideals of Facial Beauty. Cutis. 2017;100:4: 222–224.

Kar M, Muluk NB, Bafaqeeh SA, Cingi C. Is it possible to define the ideal lips? Acta Otorhinolaryngologica Italica. 2018;38:67–72.

Laurentini A, Bottino A. Computer analysis of face beauty: a survey. Comput Vis Image Underst. 2014;125:184–199.

Matthews‑Brzozowska T, Stoczkiewicz D. Estetyka twarzy w ortodontycznej ocenie klinicznej. Przegląd Stomatologiczny. 2014;3:21–24

Victorelli S, Passos J. Telomeres: beacons of autocrine and paracrine DNA damage during skin aging. Cell Cycle. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1080/15384101.2020.1728016.

Vučinić N, Tubbs RS, EriC M, Vujić Z, Marić D, Vuković B. What Do We Find Attractive about the Face?: Survey Study with Application to Aesthetic Surgery. Clin Anat. 2019;1–9.

Downloads

Published

2021-12-31

How to Cite

1.
Łącka M, Matthews‑Brzozowska T. A current look at the factors influencing face variability. JoFA [Internet]. 2021 Dec. 31 [cited 2024 May 27];4(2):128-34. Available from: https://jofa.ump.edu.pl/index.php/jofa/article/view/50

Issue

Section

Review papers

Most read articles by the same author(s)

1 2 > >>