臺灣博碩士論文加值系統

Background: This is a serial study 1) to evaluate the consistency of female
facial attractive perception across gender, age and professional background
and 2) to present whether contour lines could be used to evaluate facial
attractiveness.
Materials and methods: Series of 100 female 2D photos (one frontal, two
lateral views) were projected on a screen. Each photo lasted 5 seconds and
raters marked their impression of facial attractiveness on a 5-point Likert
scale within 3 seconds. Raters included hospital staffs and laypeople. The
consistency of facial attractive perception was compared between raters
according to gender, age, and professional background. Same protocol was
carried out with 100 contour line images extracted from 3D images of the
same samples. The evaluation was performed twice in 2 weeks apart. Raters
were laypeople only. The consistency of facial contour lines perception and
the correlation between mean facial attractive scores of 2D photos and
contour lines were calculated.
Results: High consistency was found for all of the comparisons. In the
evaluation of 2D photos, females give higher score than males and the
significant different was found among laypeople (p=0.011). No significant
different between the rating of senior and junior raters (p=0.457 and 0.781
for hospital staffs and laypeople). Hospital staffs rated significant higher
score than laypeople (p=0.005). In the evaluation of contour lines, females
give higher score than males and significant different was found in 2nd time
rating (p=0.017). The correlation between contour lines and attractiveness
was r = 0.576 and 0.574 for 1st and 2nd time evaluation.
Conclusion: The perception of 2D or contour line female facial
attractiveness was very consistent. Only gender and professional background
influence female attractive perception. The correlation between facial
attractiveness and contour lines were moderate.

指導教授推薦書
口試委員會審定書
Acknowledgement iii
abstract iv
content vi
content of tables ix
content of figures xii
Chapter 1 General introduction ………………….……………...………..1
1. Introduction ………………………………………...…..………………..1
2. Facial attractive perception …………………………..……………...…...1
3. Tools for facial attractive measurement………….….……………….....5
3.1. Anthropometry ……………………………………………….….......6
3.2. Cephalometric analysis …………………………………………........7
3.3. Three-dimensional imaging ………………………………………….9
3.3.1. 3D cephalometry………………………………………………9
3.3.2. Craniofacial morphanalysis ……………………………………9
3.3.3. CT-assisted 3D imaging………………………………………10
3.3.4. Stereolithography……………………………………………..11
3.3.5. 3D laser scanning ………………………..………………….11
3.3.6. Moiré topography …………………………………………….13
3.3.7. 3D facial morphometry ……………………………………...13
4. Facial attractive characteristics ………………….……………………14
4.1. Neoclassical canons ………………………………………………..15
4.2. Golden proportion………………………………………………...17
4.3. Cephalometric norms ………………………………………………19
4.3.1. Holdaway soft tissue analysis ………………………………..19
4.3.2. Ricketts’esthetic plane ……………………………………….25
4.3.3. Legan and Burstone soft tissue analysis ……………………..28
4.4. Facial averageness ………………………………………………….32
4.5. Facial symmetry ……………………………………………………36
5. References..……………………………………………………………..42
vii
Chapter 2 Systematic review of neoclassical canons in human face…...65
Abstract …………………………………………………………………….65
Introduction ………………………………………………………………66
Material and methods ……………………………………………………...67
Results ……………………………………………………………………...67
Discussion ………………………………………………………………….84
Conclusion …………………………………………………………………89
References ………………………………………………………………….91
Chapter 3 Systematic review of golden proportion in human face...…..94
Abstract …………………………………………………………………….94
Introduction ………………………………………………………………95
Material and methods ……………………………………………………...96
Results ……………………………………………………………………..97
Discussion ………………………………………………………………...119
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………..124
References ………………………………………………………………...125
Appendix …………………………………………………………………129
Chapter 4 Panel assessment of female attractiveness …………………130
by 2D photography
Abstract ………………………………………………………………...…130
Introduction …………………………………………………………….…131
Material and methods …………………………………………………….135
Results ……………………………………………………………………139
Discussion ………………………………………………………………...150
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………..158
References ………………………………………………………………...160
viii
Chapter 5 Female attractiveness assessed by 3D face-scan ………172
Abstract ………………………………………………………………….172
Introduction …………………………………………………………173
Material and methods …………………………………………………….176
Results ……………………………………………………………………181
Discussion ………………………………………………………………...194
Conclusion ………………………………………………………………..200
References ………………………………………………………………...201
Content of table
Chapter 1 General introduction…………………………………………...1
Table 1 Articles related to facial attractive perception .……………......2
Table 2 Mean and standard deviation of Holdaway analysis ………....22
of each population
Table 3 Comparison between Caucasian and other ethnic… …………23
normal values according to Holdaway analysis
Table 4 Comparison between different ethnic normal values ………...23
according to Holdaway analysis
Table 5 Comparison between attractive and unattractive or ………….25
normal attractive samples’ cephalometric values
according to Holdaway analysis
Table 6 Mean and standard deviation of cephalometric normal ….…..26
values of each population according to Ricketts analysis
Table 7 Comparison between attractive and unattractive or……...…...27
normal attractive samples according to Ricketts analysis
Table 8 Mean and standard deviation of cephalometric normal ……..30
values of each population according to Legan and Burstone
analysis
Table 9 Comparison between different ethnic normal values ………...31
according to Legan and Burstone analysis
Table 10 Comparison between attractive and unattractive or ………….31
normal samples’ cephalometric values
according to Legan and Burstone analysis
Table 11 Articles related to facial averageness and …….……………...34
facial attractiveness
Table 12 Articles related to facial symmetry and …………….………..40
facial attractiveness
Chapter 2 Systematic review of neoclassical canons in human face…...65
Table 1 Summarized of all articles related to neoclassical canons.…...70
Table 2 The fitting percentage of neoclassical canons ………………..74
Table 3 Variation of neoclassical canons ……...………………..….....75
Chapter 3 Systematic review of golden proportion in human face...…..94
Table 1 Summarized of all articles related to golden proportions …100
Table 2 Mean and standard deviation of vertical proportions………..108
Table 3 Mean and standard deviation of horizontal and …………….110
combined of horizontal and vertical proportions
Table 4 Comparison of golden proportions (p-value) between ……...112
different groups of samples
Table 5 Correlation (r) of golden proportions and …………………..118
facial attractiveness
Chapter 4 Panel assessment of female attractiveness …………………130
by 2D photography
Table 1 Distribution of raters’ gender, age, and …………………..…140
professional background and mean attractive scores
of each evaluation
Table 2 Mean and standard deviation of attractive scores of ……..…141
duplicated photos, statistic of differences (p value), and
correlation (r) between attractive scores of each panels
Table 3 Mean percent of raters rating with most common scale ……143
Chapter 5 Female attractiveness assessed by 3D face-scan ………172
Table 1 Command for extraction of contour lines ………….……….178
Table 2 Distribution of raters’gender, mean attractive scores ……....182
Cronbach’s alpha, ICC of each evaluation
Table 3 Mean and standard deviation, statistic of differences (p) …..184
and correlation (r) between attractive scores of
10 duplicated unattractive facial photos and contour lines
Table 4 Mean and standard deviation, statistic of differences (p).. …185
and correlation (r) between attractive scores of
10 duplicated attractive photos and contour lines
Table 5 Mean percent of raters rated 80 2D photos and ……….……186
contour lines with most common scale within 1- to
2 scale-range unattractive facial photos and contour lines
Content of figures
Chapter 2 Systematic review of neoclassical canons in human face…...65
Figure 1 Flow diagram of the overview of the selection process ……...69
Figure 2 Overall 11 proposed neoclassical canons …………………….73
Chapter 3 Systematic review of golden proportion in human face...…..94
Figure 1 Flow diagram of the overview of the selection process ……...98
Figure 2 Facial proportions mentioned by Ricketts 1982 ……..……...106
Figure 3 Facial proportions mentioned by Kiekens et al 2008 …….....116
Chapter 4 Panel assessment of female attractiveness …………………130
by 2D photography
Figure 1 Frequency of 5-point Likert scale rating of …………...…….142
most unattractive, averaged, most attractive photos
evaluated by hospital staffs and laypeople
Figure 2 Scatter gram of mean percent of hospital staffs……..............143
and laypeople using most common scale in
both 1 and 2 scale range rated facial attractiveness
of 99 and 94 photos
Figure 3 Comparison between percent of hospital staffs ………….…144
evaluated the 10 most unattractive and
the 10 most attractive photos
Figure 4 Comparison between percent of laypeople ………....…..…..145
Evaluated the 10 most unattractive and
the 10 most attractive photos
Figure 5 Scatter gram with polynomial trend lines compares...............146
mean facial attractive scores of 99 photos evaluated
by female and male hospital staffs
Figure 6 Scatter gram with polynomial trend lines compares...............146
mean facial attractive scores of 94 photos evaluated
by female and male laypeople
Figure 7 Scatter gram with polynomial trend lines compares...............148
mean facial attractive scores of 99 photos evaluated
by young and old hospital staffs
Figure 8 Scatter gram with polynomial trend lines compares...............148
mean facial attractive scores of 94 photos evaluated
by young and old laypeople
Figure 9 Scatter gram with polynomial trend lines compares...............149
mean facial attractive scores of 54 photos evaluated
by hospital staffs and laypeople
Figure 10 Scatter gram with polynomial trend lines compares...............149
mean facial attractive scores of 54 photos evaluated
by female hospital staffs, male hospital staffs,
female laypeople, and male laypeople
Figure 11 Scatter gram with polynomial trend lines compares...............150
mean facial attractive scores of 54 photos evaluated
by old hospital staffs, young hospital staffs,
old laypeople, and young laypeople
Chapter 5 Female attractiveness assessed by 3D face-scan ………172
Figure 1 Extraction of contour lines from 3dMD images …………....177
Figure 2 Scatter gram of correlation between 1st and 2nd time ……….186
contour lines evaluation within 2 week interval
Figure 3 Frequency of rating scale for the most unattractive,………...187
averaged, most attractive 2D photos and contour lines
Figure 4 Scatter gram of mean percent of raters using ……...…….....188
most common scale within 1 and 2 scale range rated
facial attractiveness of 80 2D photos and contour lines
Figure 5 Comparison between accumulated percent of raters …….….189
evaluated the 10 most unattractive and the 10 most attractive 2D photos
Figure 6 Comparison between accumulated percent of raters …….….189
evaluated the 10 most unattractive and the 10 most attractive contour lines at 1st time
Figure 7 Comparison between accumulated percent of raters …….….190
evaluated the 10 most unattractive and
the 10 most attractive contour lines at 2nd time
Figure 8 Scatter gram with polynomial trendlines of 2D photos...…...191
evaluation by female and male raters
Figure 9 Scatter gram with polynomial trendlines of 1st time………...191
contour line evaluation by female and male raters
Figure 10 Scatter gram with polynomial trendlines of 2nd time …….....192
contour line evaluation by female and male raters
Figure 11 Scatter gram with polynomial trendlines of 2D photos,..…...193
1st and 2nd time contour evaluation by all raters
Figure 12 Scatter gram and correlation line between ……………….…193
mean facial attractive score of 2D photos and 1st time contour line evaluation
Figure 13 Scatter gram and correlation line between ……………….…194
mean facial attractive score of 2D photos and 2nd time contour line evaluation

1. Abu Arqoub, S. H., &; Al-Khateeb, S. N. (2011). Perception of facial profile attractiveness of different antero-posterior and vertical proportions. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. Eur J Orthod, 33(1), 103-111. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjq028
2. Al-Gunaid, T., Yamada, K., Yamaki, M., &; Saito, I. (2007). Soft-tissue cephalometric norms in Yemeni men. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 132(5), 576 e577-514. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2007.03.018
3. al Yami, E. A., Kuijpers-Jagtman, A. M., &; Van 't Hof, M. A. (1998). Assessment of dental and facial aesthetics in adolescents. [Comparative Study]. Eur J Orthod, 20(4), 399-405.
4. Albarakati, S. F., &; Bindayel, N. A. (2012). Holdaway soft tissue cephalometric standards for Saudi adults. King Saud University Journal of Dental Sciences, 3(1), 27-32. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ksujds.2011.10.004
5. Alcalde, R. E., Jinno, T., Orsini, M. G., Sasaki, A., Sugiyama, R. M., &; Matsumura, T. (2000). Soft tissue cephalometric norms in Japanese adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 118(1), 84-89. doi: 10.1067/mod.2000.104411
6. Alcalde, R. E., Jinno, T., Pogrel, M. A., &; Matsumura, T. (1998). Cephalometric norms in Japanese adults. [Comparative Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 56(2), 129-134.
7. Alley, T. R., &; Cunningham, M. R. (1991). Averaged faces are attractive but very attractive faces are not average. Psychol Sci, 2, 123-125.
8. Baker, B. W., &; Woods, M. G. (2001). The role of the divine proportion in the esthetic improvement of patients undergoing combined orthodontic/orthognathic surgical treatment. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 16(2), 108-120.
9. Basciftci, F. A., Uysal, T., &; Buyukerkmen, A. (2003). Determination of Holdaway soft tissue norms in Anatolian Turkish adults. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 123(4), 395-400. doi: 10.1067/mod.2003.139
10. Basciftci, F. A., Uysal, T., &; Buyukerkmen, A. (2004). Craniofacial structure of Anatolian Turkish adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 125(3), 366-372. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.04.004
11. Bashour, M. (2006a). History and current concepts in the analysis of facial attractiveness. Plast Reconstr Surg, 118(3), 741-756. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000233051.61512.65
12. Bashour, M. (2006b). An objective system for measuring facial attractiveness. [Comparative Study]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 118(3), 757-774; discussion 775-756. doi: 10.1097/01.prs.0000207382.60636.1c
13. Batouche, M., &; Benlamri, R. (1994, 2-5 Oct 1994). A computer vision system for diagnosing scoliosis. Paper presented at the Systems, Man, and Cybernetics, 1994. Humans, Information and Technology., 1994 IEEE International Conference on.
14. Baudouin, J. Y., &; Tiberghien, G. (2004). Symmetry, averageness, and feature size in the facial attractiveness of women. Acta Psychol (Amst), 117(3), 313-332.
15. Baumrind, S., &; Frantz, R. C. (1971a). The reliability of head film measurements. 1. Landmark identification. Am J Orthod, 60(2), 111-127.
16. Baumrind, S., &; Frantz, R. C. (1971b). The reliability of head film measurements. 2. Conventional angular and linear measures. Am J Orthod, 60(5), 505-517.
17. Baumrind, S., Moffitt, F. H., &; Curry, S. (1983). The geometry of three-dimensional measurement from paired coplanar x-ray images. American Journal of Orthodontics, 84(4), 313-322. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0002-9416(83)90347-0
18. Berry, D. S., &; McAuthur, L. Z. (1985). Some componenets and consequences of a babyface. J Per Soc Psych, 48, 312-323.
19. Bill, J. S., Reuther, J. F., Dittmann, W., Kübler, N., Meier, J. L., Pistner, H., &; Wittenberg, G. (1995). Stereolithography in oral and maxillofacial operation planning. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 24(1, Part 2), 98-103. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0901-5027(05)80869-0
20. Birkeland, K., Boe, O. E., &; Wisth, P. J. (1996). Orthodontic concern among 11-year-old children and their parents compared with orthodontic treatment need assessed by index of orthodontic treatment need. [Comparative Study]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 110(2), 197-205.
21. Bozkir, M. G., Karakas, P., &; Oguz, O. (2004). Vertical and horizontal neoclassical facial canons in Turkish young adults. [Comparative Study]. Surg Radiol Anat, 26(3), 212-219. doi: 10.1007/s00276-003-0202-2
22. Broadbent, B. H. (1931). A new x-ray technique adn its application to orthodontia. Angle Orthod, 1, 45-66.
23. Burstone, C. J. (1958). Integumental profile. Am J Orthod, 44, 1-25.
24. Burstone, C. J. (1967). Lip posture and its significance in treatment planning. Am J Orthod, 53, 262-284.
25. Bush, K., &; Antonyshyn, O. (1996). Three-dimensional facial anthropometry using a laser surface scanner: validation of the technique. Plast Reconstr Surg, 98(2), 226-235.
26. Chan, E. K., Soh, J., Petocz, P., &; Darendeliler, M. A. (2008). Esthetic evaluation of Asian-Chinese profiles from a white perspective. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 133(4), 532-538. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.03.038
27. Choe, K. S., Sclafani, A. P., Litner, J. A., Yu, G. P., &; Romo, T., 3rd. (2004). The Korean American woman's face: anthropometric measurements and quantitative analysis of facial aesthetics. Arch Facial Plast Surg, 6(4), 244-252. doi: 10.1001/archfaci.6.4.244
28. Cons, N. C., &; Jenny, J. (1994). Comparing perceptions of dental aesthetics in the USA with those in eleven ethnic groups. Int Dent J., 44(6), 489-494.
29. Daniels, A. S., Seacat, J. D., &; Inglehart, M. R. (2009). Orthodontic treatment motivation and cooperation: A cross-sectional analysis of
adolescent patients' and parents' responses. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 136(6), 780-787.
30. Danikas, D., &; Panagopoulos, G. (2004). The golden ratio and proportions of beauty. [Letter]. Plast Reconstr Surg, 114(4), 1009.
31. Dhirawani, R. (2013). Stereolithography: A Recent Tool in Diagnosis, Treatment Planning, and Management of Craniofacial Deformities. In V. Kumar &; M. Bhatele (Eds.), Proceedings of All India Seminar on Biomedical Engineering 2012 (AISOBE 2012) (pp. 1-7): Springer India.
32. Downs, W. B. (1948). Variations in facial relationships: their significance to treatment and prognosis. Am J Orthod, 34, 812.
33. Downs, W. B. (1952). Analysis of the dentofacial profileThe role of cephalometrics in orthodontic case analysis. Angle Orthod 38, 162-169.
34. Edler, R. J. (2001). Background considerations to facial aesthetics. Journal of orthodontics, 28(2), 159-168.
35. Erbay, E. F., &; Caniklioğlu, C. M. (2002). Soft tissue profile in Anatolian Turkish adults: Part II. Comparison of different soft tissue analyses in the evaluation of beauty. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 121(1), 65-72. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1067/mod.2002.119573
36. Fan, J., Chau, K. P., Wan, X., Zhai, L., &; Lau, E. (2012). Prediction of facial attractiveness from facial proportions. Pattern Recognition, 45(6), 2326-2334. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2011.11.024
37. Fang, F., Clapham, P. J., &; Chung, K. C. (2011). A systematic review of inter-ethnic variability in facial dimensions. Plast Reconstr Surg, 127(2), 874.
38. Farkas, L. G. (1996). Accuracy of anthropometric measurements: past, present, and future. Cleft Palate Craniofac J, 33(1), 10-18; discussion 19-22. doi: 10.1597/1545-1569(1996)033<0010:aoampp>2.3.co;2
39. Farkas, L. G., Forrest, C. R., &; Litsas, L. (2000). Revision of neoclassical facial canons in young adult Afro-Americans. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 24(3), 179-184.
40. Farkas, L. G., Hreczko, T. A., Kolar, J. C., &; Munro, I. R. (1985). Vertical and horizontal proportions of the face in young adult North American Caucasians: revision of neoclassical canons. Plast Reconstr Surg, 75(3), 328-338.
41. Farkas, L. G., Katic, M. J., &; Forrest, C. R. (2005). International anthropometric study of facial morphology in various ethnic groups/races. J Craniofac Surg, 16(4), 615-646.
42. Farkas, L. G., Katic, M. J., Hreczko, T. A., Deutsch, C., &; Munro, I. R. (1984). Anthropometric proportions in the upper lip-lower lip-chin area of the lower face in young white adults. Am J Orthod, 86(1), 52-60.
43. Farkas, L. G., Tompson, B., Phillips, J. H., Katic, M. J., &; Cornfoot, M. L. (1999). Comparison of anthropometric and cephalometric measurements of the adult face. J Craniofac Surg, 10(1), 18-25.
44. Ferrario, V. F., Sforza, C., Miani Jr, A., &; Serrao, G. (1995). A three-dimensional evaluation of human facial asymmetry. Journal of anatomy, 186(Pt 1), 103.
45. Ferrario, V. F., Sforza, C., Poggio, C. E., Cova, M., &; Tartaglia, G. (1998). Preliminary evaluation of an electromagnetic three-dimensional digitizer in facial anthropometry. Cleft Palate Craniofac J, 35(1), 9-15. doi: 10.1597/1545-1569(1998)035<0009:peoaet>2.3.co;2
46. Ferrario, V. F., Sforza, C., Poggio, C. E., &; Serrao, G. (1996). Facial three-dimensional morphometry. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 109(1), 86-93. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0889-5406(96)70167-1
47. Ferrigno, G., &; Pedotti, A. (1985). ELITE: a digital dedicated hardware system for movement analysis via real-time TV signal processing. IEEE Trans Biomed Eng, 32(11), 943-950. doi: 10.1109/tbme.1985.325627
48. Flores-Mir, C., Silva, E., Barriga, M. I., Lagravere, M. O., &; Major, P. W. (2004). Lay person's perception of smile aesthetics in dental and facial views. [Comparative Study]. J Orthod, 31(3), 204-209; discussion 201. doi: 10.1179/146531204225022416
49. Fourie, Z., Damstra, J., Gerrits, P. O., &; Ren, Y. (2010). Accuracy and reliability of facial soft tissue depth measurements using cone beam computer tomography. Forensic Science International, 199(1–3), 9-14. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.forsciint.2010.02.018
50. Frigo, C. (1990). Three-dimensional model for studying the dynamic loads on the spine during lifting. Clinical Biomechanics, 5(3), 143-152. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0268-0033(90)90017-Z
51. Galton, F. (1878). Composite portraits. Journal of the Anthropological Institute of Great Britain and Ireland, 8, 132-142.
52. Gelgor, I. E., Karaman, A. I., &; Zekic, E. (2006). The use of parental data to evaluate soft tissues in an Anatolian Turkish population according to Holdaway soft tissue norms. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 129(3), 330 e331-339. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.09.024
53. Graber, L. W., Vanarsdall, R. L., &; Vig, K. W. L. (2011). Orthodontics: Current Principles and Techniques: Elsevier Health Sciences.
54. Grammer, K., &; Thornhill, R. (1994). Human (Homo sapiens) facial attractiveness and sexual selection: the role of symmetry and averageness. [Comparative Study]. J Comp Psychol, 108(3), 233-242.
55. Grayson, B., Cutting, C., Bookstein, F. L., Kim, H., &; McCarthy, J. G. (1988). The three-dimensional cephalogram: Theory, techniques, and clinical application. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 94(4), 327-337. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0889-5406(88)90058-3
56. Gribel, B. F., Gribel, M. N., Frazao, D. C., McNamara, J. A., Jr., &; Manzi, F. R. (2011). Accuracy and reliability of craniometric measurements on lateral cephalometry and 3D measurements on CBCT scans. Angle Orthod, 81(1), 26-35. doi: 10.2319/032210-166.1
57. Griffin, A. M., &; Langlois, J. H. (2006). Stereotype Directionality and Attractiveness Stereotyping: Is beauty Good or is Ugly Bad? Soc Cogn., 24(2), 187-206.
58. Hajeer, M. Y., Ayoub, A. F., Millett, D. T., Bock, M., &; Siebert, J. P. (2002). Three-dimensional imaging in orthognathic surgery: the clinical application of a new method. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg, 17(4), 318-330.
59. Halazonetis, D. J. (2007). Morphometric evaluation of soft-tissue profile shape. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 131(4), 481-489. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.06.031
60. Hamdan, A. M. (2010). Soft tissue morphology of Jordanian adolescents. Angle Orthod, 80(1), 80-85.
61. Havens, D. C., McNamara Jr, J. A., Siglerc, L. M., &; Baccettid, T. (2010). The role of the posed smile in overall facial esthetics. Angle Orthod :, 80, 322-328.
62. Hier, L. A., Evans, C. A., BeGole, E. A., &; Giddon, D. B. (1999). Comparison of preferences in lip position using computer animated imaging. Angle Orthod, 69(3), 231-238. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(1999)069<0231:copilp>2.3.co;2
63. Holdaway, R. A. (1983). A soft tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod, 84, 1-28.
64. Holland, E. (2008). Marquardt's Phi mask: pitfalls of relying on fashion models and the golden ratio to describe a beautiful face. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 32(2), 200-208. doi: 10.1007/s00266-007-9080-z
65. Honn, M., &; Goz, G. (2007). [The ideal of facial beauty: a review]. [Review]. J Orofac Orthop, 68(1), 6-16. doi: 10.1007/s00056-007-0604-6
66. Husein, O. F., Sepehr, A., Garg, R., Sina-Khadiv, M., Gattu, S., Waltzman, J., . . . Galle, S. E. (2010). Anthropometric and aesthetic analysis of the Indian American woman's face. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 63(11), 1825-1831. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2009.10.032
67. Hussein, E., Al Khateeb, S., Watted, N., &; Aksoy, A. (2011). Evaluation of facial soft tissue parameters for Palestinians using Holdaway analysis. The Saudi Dental Journal, 23(4), 191-195.
68. Hwang, H.-S., Yuan, D., Jeong, K.-H., Uhm, G.-S., Cho, J.-H., &; Yoon, S.-J. (2012). Three-dimensional soft tissue analysis for the evaluation of facial asymmetry in normal occlusion individuals. Korean J Orthod, 42(2), 56-63.
69. Ikeda, T., &; H, T. (1981). Development of the moiré method with special reference to its application to biostereometrics. Optics &; Laser Technology, 13(6), 302-306. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0030-3992(81)90034-7
70. Jain, P., &; Kalra, J. P. S. (2011). Soft tissue cephalometric norms for a North Indian population group using Legan and Burstone analysis. International Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 40(3), 255-259.
71. Jayaratne, Y. S., Deutsch, C. K., McGrath, C. P., &; Zwahlen, R. A. (2012). Are neoclassical canons valid for southern chinese faces? PLoS One, 7(12), e52593. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0052593
72. Jefferson, Y. (1996). Skeletal types: key to unraveling the mystery of facial beauty and its biologic significance. [Review]. J Gen Orthod, 7(2), 7-25.
73. Jefferson, Y. (2004). Facial beauty--establishing a universal standard. Int J Orthod Milwaukee, 15(1), 9-22.
74. Joe, P. S., Ito, Y., Shih, A. M., Oestenstad, R. K., &; Lungu, C. T. (2011). Comparison of a Novel Surface Laser Scanning Anthropometric Technique to Traditional Methods for Facial
Parameter Measurements. Journal of Occupational and Environmental Hygiene, 9(2), 81-88. doi: 10.1080/15459624.2011.640557
75. Johnston, C. D., Burden, D. J., &; Stevenson, M. R. (1999). The influence of dental to facial midline discrepancies on dental attractiveness ratings. Eur J Orthod, 21(5), 517-522.
76. Jones, B. C., DeBruine, L. M., &; Little, A. C. (2007). The role of symmetry in attraction to average faces. Percept Psychophys, 69(8), 1273-1277.
77. Kau, C. H., Richmond, S., Zhurov, A. I., Knox, J., Chestnutt, I., Hartles, F., &; Playle, R. (2005). Reliability of measuring facial morphology with a 3-dimensional laser scanning system. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 128(4), 424-430. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.06.037
78. Kau, C. H., Zhurov, A., Scheer, R., Bouwman, S., &; Richmond, S. (2004). The feasibility of measuring three-dimensional facial morphology in children. Orthodontics &; Craniofacial Research, 7(4), 198-204. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2004.00289.x
79. Kawai, T., Natsume, N., Shibata, H., &; Yamamoto, T. (1990). Three-dimensional analysis of facial morphology using moire stripes. Part I. Method. Int J Oral Maxillofac Surg, 19(6), 356-358.
80. Kerr, W. J., &; O'Donnell, J. M. (1990). Panel perception of facial attractiveness. Br J Orthod, 17(4), 299-304.
81. Kiekens, R. M., van 't Hof, M. A., Straatman, H., Kuijpers-Jagtman, A. M., &; Maltha, J. C. (2007). Influence of panel composition on
aesthetic evaluation of adolescent faces. Eur J Orthod, 29(1), 95-99. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjl060
82. Kiekens, R. M. A., Maltha, J. C., van ‘t Hof, M. A., &; Kuijpers-Jagtman, A. M. (2005). A measuring system for facial aesthetics in Caucasian adolescents: reproducibility and validity. The European Journal of Orthodontics, 27(6), 579-584. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cji053
83. Kim, Y. H. (2011). Easy facial analysis using the facial golden mask. J Craniofac Surg, 18(3), 643-649.
84. Kokich, V. O., Kokich, V. G., &; Kiyak, H. A. (2006). Perceptions of dental professionals and laypersons to altered dental esthetics: asymmetric and symmetric situations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 130(2), 141-151. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.04.017
85. Komori, M., Kawamura, S., &; Ishihara, S. (2009a). Averageness or symmetry: which is more important for facial attractiveness? Acta Psychol (Amst), 131(2), 136-142. doi: 10.1016/j.actpsy.2009.03.008
86. Komori, M., Kawamura, S., &; Ishihara, S. (2009b). Effect of averageness and sexual dimorphism on the judgment of facial attractiveness. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. Vision Res, 49(8), 862-869. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2009.03.005
87. Kovacs, L., Zimmermann, A., Brockmann, G., Guhring, M., Baurecht, H., Papadopulos, N. A., . . . Zeilhofer, H. F. (2006). Three-dimensional recording of the human face with a 3D laser scanner. J Plast Reconstr Aesthet Surg, 59(11), 1193-1202. doi: 10.1016/j.bjps.2005.10.025
88. Kowner, R. (1996). Facial asymmetry and attractiveness judgment in developmental perspective. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. J Exp Psychol Hum Percept Perform, 22(3), 662-675.
89. Krneta, B., Primožič, J., Zhurov, A., Richmond, S., &; Ovsenik, M. (2012). Three-dimensional evaluation of facial morphology in children aged 5–6 years with a Class III malocclusion. The European Journal of Orthodontics. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cjs018
90. Kusnoto, B., &; Evans, C. A. (2002). Reliability of a 3D surface laser scanner for orthodontic applications. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 122(4), 342-348.
91. Langlois J. H., Roggman L. A., &; L., M. (1994). What is average and what is not average about attractive faces? Psychological Science, , 5, 214-220.
92. Langlois J.H., &; L.A., R. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychological science, 1(2), 115-121.
93. Langlois, J. H., Kalakanis, L., Rubenstein, A. J., Larson, A., Hallam, M., &; Smoot, M. (2000). Maxims or myths of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychological Bulletin, 126(3), 390-423.
94. Langlois, J. H., &; Roggman, L. A. (1990). Attractive faces are only average. Psychol Sci, 1, 115-121.
95. Langlois, J. H., Roggman, L. A., Casey, R. J., Ritter, J. M., Rieser-Danner, A., L., . . . Y., V. (1987). Infant preferences for attractive faces: Rudiments of a stereotype? Dev.Psychol, 23, 363-369.
96. Lay, Y.-L., Yang, H.-J., Lin, C.-S., &; Chen, W.-Y. (2012). 3D face recognition by shadow moiré. Optics &; Laser Technology, 44(1), 148-152. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.optlastec.2011.06.009
97. Le, T. T., Farkas, L. G., Ngim, R. C., Levin, L. S., &; Forrest, C. R. (2002). Proportionality in Asian and North American Caucasian faces using neoclassical facial canons as criteria. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 26(1), 64-69. doi: 10.1007/s00266-001-0033-7
98. Legan, H. L., &; Burstone, C. J. (1980). Soft tissue cephalometric analysis for orthognathic surgery. [Case Reports]. J Oral Surg, 38(10), 744-751.
99. Levin, E. I. (1978). Dental esthetics and the golden proportion. [Comparative Study]. J Prosthet Dent, 40(3), 244-252.
100. Lew, K. K. K., Ho, K. K., Keng, S. B., &; Ho, K. H. (1992). Soft-tissue cephalometric norms in Chinese adults with esthetic facial profiles. Journal of oral and maxillofacial surgery : official journal of the American Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons, 50(11), 1184-1189.
101. Lundstrom, A., Woodside, D. G., &; Popovich, F. (1987). Panel assessments of facial profile related to mandibular growth direction. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. Eur J Orthod, 9(4), 271-278.
102. Marquardt, S. R. (2002). Dr. Stephen R. Marquardt on the Golden Decagon and human facial beauty. Interview by Dr. Gottlieb. [Interview]. J Clin Orthod, 36(6), 339-347.
103. Matoula, S., &; Pancherz, H. (2006). Skeletofacial morphology of attractive and nonattractive faces. [Comparative Study]. Angle Orthod,
76(2), 204-210. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2006)076[0204:SMOAAN]2.0.CO;2
104. McCance, A. M., Moss, J. P., Fright, W. R., James, D. R., &; Linney, A. D. (1992). A three dimensional analysis of soft and hard tissue changes following bimaxillary orthognathic surgery in skeletal III patients. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 30(5), 305-312. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/0266-4356(92)90180-Q
105. Merrifield, L. L. (1966). The profile line as an aid in critically evaluating facial esthetics Am J Orthod, 52, 804-822.
106. Møller, A. P., &; Thornhill, R. (1998). Bilateral symmetry and sexual selection: A meta-analysis. The American Naturalist, 151(2), 174-192.
107. Moss, J. P., Linney, A. D., &; Lowey, M. N. (1995). The use of 3D techniques in facial esthetics. Semin Orthod, 1(2), 94-104.
108. Motoyoshi, M., Namura, S., &; Arai, H. Y. (1992). A three-dimensional measuring system for the human face using three-directional photography. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 101(5), 431-440.
109. Mugonzibwa, E. A., Kuijpers-Jagtman, A. M., Van 't Hof, M. A., &; Kikwilu, E. N. (2004). Perceptions of dental attractiveness and orthodontic treatment need among Tanzanian children. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 125(4), 426-433; discussion 433-424. doi: 10.1016/s088954060300948x
110. Naini, F. B., &; Gill, D. S. (2008). Facial aesthetics: 1. Concepts and canons. Dent Update, 35(2), 102-104, 106-107.
111. Negi, N., Verma, S., Negi, K. S., Kaundal, J. R., &; Sood, S. (2012). Soft-tissue cephalometric norms for north Indian Mongoloids.
Orthodontic Waves, 71(3), 85-89. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.odw.2012.04.001
112. Nestor, M. S., Stillman, M. A., &; Frisina, A. C. (2010). Subjective and objective facial attractiveness: ratings and gender differences in objective appraisals of female faces. J Clin Aesthet Dermatol, 3(12), 31-36.
113. Ngom, P. I., Brown, R., Diagne, F., Normand, F., &; Richmond, S. (2005). A cultural comparison of treatment need. [Comparative Study]. Eur J Orthod, 27(6), 597-600. doi: 10.1093/ejo/cji030
114. Noor, F., &; Evans, D. C. (2003). The effect of facial symmetry on perceptions of personality and attractiveness. Journal of Research in Personality, 37(4), 339-347. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/S0092-6566(03)00022-9
115. Oh, H. S., Korn, E. L., Zhang, X., Liu, Y., Xu, T., Boyd, R., &; Baumrind, S. (2009). Correlations between cephalometric and photographic measurements of facial attractiveness in Chinese and US patients after orthodontic treatment. American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 136(6), 762.e761-762.e714. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2009.04.020
116. Onyeaso, C. O. (2003). An assessment of relationship between self-esteem, orthodontic concern, and Dental Aesthetic Index (DAI) scores among secondary school students in Ibadan, Nigeria. Int Dent J, 53(2), 79-84.
117. Orsini, M. G., Huang, G. J., Kiyak, H. A., Ramsay, D. S., Bollen, A.-M., Anderson, N. K., &; Giddon, D. B. (2006). Methods to evaluate profile preferences for the anteroposterior position of the mandible.
American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics, 130(3), 283-291. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.01.026
118. Paiva, J. B., Attizzani, M. F., Miasiro Junior, H., &; Rino Neto, J. (2010). Facial harmony in orthodontic diagnosis and planning. Braz Oral Res, 24(1), 52-57.
119. Peck, S., &; Peck, L. (1995). Selected aspects of the art and science of facial esthetics. Semin Orthod, 1(2), 105-126.
120. Peerlings, R. H., Kuijpers-Jagtman, A. M., &; Hoeksma, J. B. (1995). A photographic scale to measure facial aesthetics. Eur J Orthod, 17(2), 101-109.
121. Perrett, D. I., Burt M., Penton-Voak IS, Lee KJ, Rowland, D., &; R., E. (1999). Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evol Hum Behav, 20, 295-307.
122. Perrett, D. I., May, K. A., &; Yoshikawa, S. (1994). Facial shape and judgement of female attractiveness. Nature, 386, 239-242.
123. Philips, C., Tulloch, C., &; Dann, C. (1992). Rating of facial attractiveness Community Dent Oral Epidemiol, 20, 214-220.
124. Pinho, S., Ciriaco, C., Faber, J., &; Lenza, M. A. (2007). Impact of dental asymmetries on the perception of smile esthetics. [Comparative Study]. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 132(6), 748-753. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2006.01.039
125. Porter, J. P. (2004). The average African American male face: an anthropometric analysis. Arch Facial Plast Surg, 6(2), 78-81. doi: 10.1001/archfaci.6.2.78
126. Potter, T., &; Corneille, O. (2008). Locating attractiveness in the face space: faces are more attractive when closer to their group prototype. Psychon Bull Rev, 15(3), 615-622.
127. Principe, C. P., &; Langlois, J. H. (2011). Faces differing in attractiveness elicit corresponding affective responses. [Comparative Study Research Support, N.I.H., Extramural]. Cogn Emot, 25(1), 140-148. doi: 10.1080/02699931003612098
128. Proffit, W. R., Fields, H. W., &; Sarver, D. M. (2006). Contemporary Orthodontics: Elsevier Health Sciences.
129. Quinn, P. C., Kelly, D. J., Lee, K., Pascalis, O., &; Slater, A. M. (2008 ). Preference for attractive faces in human infants extends beyond conspecifics. Dev Sci., 11(1), 76-83.
130. Rabey, G. (1971). Craniofacial morphanalysis. Proc R Soc Med, 64(2), 103-111.
131. Rabey, G. P. (1977). Current principles of morphanalysis and their implications in oral surgical practice. The British journal of oral surgery, 15(2), 97-109.
132. Reyneke, J. P., &; Ferretti, C. (2012). Clinical assessment of the face. Paper presented at the Semin Orthod.
133. Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't Review]. Annu Rev Psychol, 57, 199-226. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208
134. Rhodes, G., Proffitt, F., Grady, J. M., &; Sumich, A. (1998). Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonomic Bulletic &; Review, 5(4), 659-669.
135. Rhodes, G., Sumich, A., &; Byatt, G. (1999). Are average facial configurations attractive only because of their symmetry? . Psychol Sci, 10(1), 52-58.
136. Rhodes, G., Yoshikawa, S., Clark, A., Lee, K., McKay, R., &; Akamatsu, S. (2001). Attractiveness of facial averageness and symmetry in non-western cultures: in search of biologically based standards of beauty. Perception, 30(5), 611-625.
137. Ricketts, R. M. (1957). Planning treatment on the basis of the facial pattern and an estimate of its growth. Angle Orthod, 27, 14-37.
138. Ricketts, R. M. (1969). The evolution of diagnosis to computerized cephalometrics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 55, 795-803.
139. Ricketts, R. M. (1982). The biologic significance of the divine proportion and Fibonacci series. Am J Orthod, 81(5), 351-370.
140. Samuels CA, Butterworth G, Roberts T, Graupner L, &; G., H. (1994). Facial aesthetics—babies prefer attractiveness to symmetry. Perception, 23, 823–831.
141. Saraswathi, P. (2007). The golden proportion adn its application to the human face. Eur J Anat.
142. Sarver, D. M. (1998). Esthetic Orthodontics and Orthognathic Surgery: Mosby.
143. Sarver, D. M., &; Rousso, D. R. (2004). Surgical procedures to improve esthetics when orthognathic surgery is not an option Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 126(3), 299-301.
144. Scheib, J. E., Gangestad, S. W., &; Thornhill, R. (1999). Facial attractiveness, symmetry and cues of good genes. [Research Support,
Non-U.S. Gov't]. Proc Biol Sci, 266(1431), 1913-1917. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1999.0866
145. Schmid, K., D. Marx, et al. . (2008). Computation of a face attractiveness index based on neoclassical canons, symmetry, and golden ratios. Pattern Recognition, 41(8), 2710-2717.
146. Seghers, M. J., Longacre, J. J., &; Destefano, G. A. (1964). The golden proportion of beauty. Plast Reconstr Surg, 34, 382-386.
147. Sforza, C., Laino, A., D'Alessio, R., Grandi, G., Binelli, M., &; Ferrario, V. F. (2009). Soft-tissue facial characteristics of attractive Italian women as compared to normal women. Angle Orthod, 79(1), 17-23. doi: 10.2319/122707-605.1
148. Sforza, C., Laino, A., D'Alessio, R., Grandi, G., Tartaglia, G. M., &; Ferrario, V. F. (2008). Soft-tissue facial characteristics of attractive and normal adolescent boys and girls. Angle Orthod, 78(5), 799-807. doi: 10.2319/091207-431.1
149. Sforza, C., Peretta, R., Grandi, G., Ferronato, G., &; Ferrario, V. F. (2007). Three-dimensional facial morphometry in skeletal Class III patients: A non-invasive study of soft-tissue changes before and after orthognathic surgery. British Journal of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, 45(2), 138-144.
150. Shaw, W. C., Rees, G., Dawe, M., &; Charles, C. R. (1985). The influence of dentofacial appearance on the social attractiveness of young adults. Am J Orthod., 87(1), 21-26.
151. Shell, T. L., &; Woods, M. G. (2004). Facial aesthetics and the divine proportion: a comparison of surgical and non-surgical class II
treatment. [Comparative Study Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. Aust Orthod J, 20(2), 51-63.
152. Snow, S. R. (1999). Esthetic smile analysis of maxillary anterior tooth width: the golden percentage. J Esthet Dent, 11(4), 177-184.
153. Spyropoulos, M. N., &; Halazonetis, D. J. (2001). Significance of the soft tissue profile on facial esthetics. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 119(5), 464-471. doi: 10.1067/mod.2001.113656
154. Steiner, C. C. (1959). Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod, 29, 8-29.
155. Steiner, C. C. (1960). The use of cephalometrics as an aid to planning and assessing orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod, 46, 721-735.
156. Swaddle, J. P., &; Cuthill, I. C. (1995). Asymmetry and human facial attractiveness: symmetry may not always be beautiful. [Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't]. Proc Biol Sci, 261(1360), 111-116. doi: 10.1098/rspb.1995.0124
157. Swift, A., &; Remington, K. (2011). BeautiPHIcation: a global approach to facial beauty. Clin Plast Surg, 38(3), 347-377, v. doi: 10.1016/j.cps.2011.03.012
158. Taki, A. A., Oguz, F., &; Abuhijleh, E. (2009). Facial soft tissue values in Persian adults with normal occlusion and well-balanced faces. Angle Orthod, 79(3), 491-494. doi: 10.2319/020408-62.1
159. Tatarunaite, E., Playle, R., Hood, K., Shaw, W., &; Richmond, S. (2005). Facial attractiveness: a longitudinal study. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 127(6), 676-682; quiz 755. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2004.01.029
160. Toma, A. M., Zhurov, A., Playle, R., Ong, E., &; Richmond, S. (2009). Reproducibility of facial soft tissue landmarks on 3D laser-scanned facial images. Orthodontics &; Craniofacial Research, 12(1), 33-42. doi: 10.1111/j.1601-6343.2008.01435.x
161. Türkkahraman, H., &; Gökalp, H. (2004). Facial Profile Preferences Among Various Layers of Turkish Population. Angle Orthod, 74(5), 640-647. doi: 10.1043/0003-3219(2004)074<0640:fppavl>2.0.co;2
162. Uysal, T., Yagci, A., Aldrees, A. M., &; Ekizer, E. (2011). Ethnic differences in dentofacial relationships of Turkish and Saudi young adults with normal occlusions and well-balanced faces. The Saudi Dental Journal, 23(4), 183-190. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.sdentj.2011.08.002
163. Valentine, T., Darling, S., &; Donnelly, M. (2004). Why are average faces attractive? The effect of view and averageness on the attractiveness of female faces. Psychon Bull Rev, 11(3), 482-487.
164. Valenzano, D. R., Mennucci, A., Tartarelli, G., &; Cellerino, A. (2006). Shape analysis of female facial attractiveness. Vision Res, 46(8-9), 1282-1291. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2005.10.024
165. Vargo, J. K., Gladwin, M., &; Ngan, P. (2003). Association between ratings of facial attractivess and patients' motivation for orthognathic surgery. Orthod Craniofac Res, 6(1), 63-71.
166. Vegter, F., &; Hage, J. J. (2000). Clinical Anthropometry and Canons of the Face in Historical Perspective. Plast Reconstr Surg, 106(5), 1090-1096.
167. Wahl, N. (2006). Orthodontics in 3 millennia. Chapter 7: Facial analysis before the advent of the cephalometer. [Historical Article].
Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 129(2), 293-298. doi: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2005.12.011
168. Wang, D., Qian, G., Zhang, M., &; Farkas, L. G. (1997). Differences in horizontal, neoclassical facial canons in Chinese (Han) and North American Caucasian populations. [Comparative Study]. Aesthetic Plast Surg, 21(4), 265-269.
169. Ward, R. E., &; Jamison, P. L. (1991). Measurement precision and reliability in craniofacial anthropometry: implications and suggestions for clinical applications. J Craniofac Genet Dev Biol, 11, 156-164.
170. Zaidel, D. W., Aarde, S. M., &; Baig, K. (2005). Appearance of symmetry, beauty, and health in human faces. [Clinical Trial Comparative Study]. Brain Cogn, 57(3), 261-263. doi: 10.1016/j.bandc.2004.08.056
171. Zhang, D., Zhao, Q., &; Chen, F. (2011). Quantitative analysis of human facial beauty using geometric features. Pattern Recognition, 44(4), 940-950. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.patcog.2010.10.013