engleski

Gender differences in perception of facial aesthetics

Objectives: The aim of this study was to examine whether perception of facial aesthetics relates to gender in a homogeneous group of examinees with high aesthetic expectations and of the same educational background as regards aesthetic norms. Furthermore, the aim was to explore differences between emotional and social aspect of perception of attractiveness. Materials and Methods: One hundred and thirty - nine dental students from the School of Medicine in Rijeka were involved in this investigation, 52 male (37.4%) and 87 female (62.6%), aged 19-28 (mean age 22.5±2.3). Dental students were selected in order to have a homogeneous sample with high aesthetic expectations and of the same educational background as regards aesthetic norms. Two sets of colour photographs were used which represented 14 male and 14 female distortions of Caucasian facial profiles which reveal different dentoalveolar and skeletal sagittal maxillo-mandibular relations. Examinees evaluated the profiles with a numeric rating scale ranging from 0 to 10 where 0 stands for „least attractive“, and 10 for „most attractive“. The profiles of the opposite gender were evaluated from both social and emotional aspect, while those of the same gender were evaluated only from the social aspect. The cluster analysis and two-way ANOVA were used in the statistical analysis. Results: As regards male facial profiles, ANOVA showed statistically significant differences in scoring profile types and significant influence of valuator’s gender (p<0.001). Both genders consider the flat profile and a mild bialveolar retrusion or protrusion to be the most beautiful. However, women gave significantly higher scores to males with mild bialveolar retrusion or moderate protrusion, but lower scores to extremely convex profiles than man (p<0.05). Cluster analysis shows that men differentiate only skeletal from dentoalveolar modifications in males. On the other hand, women classify men into three clusters. They consider men with exceptionally full lips and prominent or deficient chins to be less attractive and more similar to skeletal deviations (p<0.05). As regards female facial profiles, there were statistically significant differences in scoring profile types (p<0.001), but there was no significant influence of valuator’s gender. Both genders gave highest marks to bialveolar protrusions, but slight lip prominence is considered to be more beautiful than the intense one. Cluster analysis shows that both genders group female profiles in the same way. Differences in male’s scoring of female profiles are related to profile type and aspect of evaluation (p<0.001). Females with prominent lips, less prominent chin or mild convex profile are considered the most attractive. Cluster analysis pointed out that men group female profiles in the same way, regardless of whether it's social or emotional evaluation. However, each profile got higher scores in social than emotional evaluation (p<0.05). Differences in women’s scoring of male profiles are related to profile type and aspect of evaluation (p<0.001). Females with prominent lips, less prominent chin or mild convex profile are considered the most attractive. Each profile got higher scores in social than emotional evaluation (p<0.05), and difference was not statistically significant only in profile with mild bialveolar protrusion. With regard to emotional evaluation, women consider pronounced and moderate bialveolar retrusion as closer to the cluster of less attractive profiles, while the same amount of retrusion is considered to be closer to the cluster of more attractive profiles at social evaluation. Conclusion: Women pay more attention to details than men in evaluating facial profile aesthetics, mostly in evaluating male profiles.

facial profile; perception; atractivness; aesthetics

nije evidentirano