Assessment of facial harmony among Caucasian Spaniards 18 to 60 years of age and its relationship with the golden ratio
Throughout history, the perception and definition of beauty and attractiveness have changed and have been influenced by cultural norms. This article analyzes the concept of “facial normality” (faces that are considered normal by 90% of respondents and, therefore, do not require esthetic surgery) among Spaniards of Caucasian ancestry. We also sought to determine the relationship between faces that are considered “normal” and the golden ratio.
We surveyed 54 respondents (equal numbers of women and men) between the ages of 18 and 60. The surveys followed the visual analog scale (VAS) protocol, and 13,514 responses were obtained. The respondents were asked to evaluate up to nine photographed faces according to their degree of attractiveness.
According to the data obtained, “facial normality” or facial beauty can be defined by the following characteristics: (a) the sizes of the three facial segments (equal in proportion), (b) the width of the nose (narrow in women and average in men), and (c) the profile (straight or slightly retracted in women and straight or slightly prominent in men). In addition, five specific facial proportions were directly related to the golden ratio. Thus, the concept of “normal” can be applied to 90% of faces whose proportions fall within distinct ranges that encompass the value of the golden ratio.
We conclude that a standard perception of “facial normality” and facial beauty does exist. We also observed a general correlation between specific facial proportions and the golden ratio.
Level of Evidence: Not ratable.
KeywordsFacial beauty Divine proportion Golden ratio Orthognathic surgery
Compliance with ethical standards
Conflict of interest
José Francisco Ballester Ferrandis, Francisco Martínez Soriano, Maria Isabel Ribera Vega, and Juan José Font Ferrandis declare that they have no conflict of interest.
Patients provided written consent for the use of their images.
For this type of study formal consent is not required.
- 1.Maslow AH (1943) A theory of human motivation. Psychol Rev 50(4):370–396Google Scholar
- 2.Bashoure M (2006) An objetive system for measuring facial attractiveness plast. Plast Reconstr Surg 118:757–774Google Scholar
- 6.Ricketts RM (1982) Divine proportion in facial esthetics. Clin Plast Surg Ovt 9(4):401–422Google Scholar
- 10.Shell TL, Woody MG. (2004) Facial aesthetics and the divine proportion; a comparison of surgical and non. surgical class II treatment. Aust. Orthod. J 20 (2), 51–63Google Scholar
- 11.Holland E (2008) Marquardt’s Phi mask: pit falls of relying on fashion models and the golden ratio to describe a beautiful face. Aesthetic Plast Surg 32:200–208Google Scholar
- 13.Rajiv A, Juhi Y (2014) Golden proportions as predictors of attracstiveness and malocclusion. Indian J Den Rev 25(6):788–793Google Scholar
- 14.Perrett D., May Ka, Yoshikawa S. (1994). Facial shape and judgements of female attractiveness. Nature. 17, 368 (6468) 239–242Google Scholar
- 19.Soler C, Kekäläimen J, Númez M, Sancho M, Núñez J, Yaber I, Gutiérrez R (2012) Male facial anthropometry and Attractriveness. Perception 41 (20), 1234-1245.Google Scholar
- 20.Swaddle JP, Cuthiel IC (1995) Asymmetry and human facial attractiveness: Symmetry may not always be beautiful. Proc Bill Sci 261(1360):111–6Google Scholar
- 21.Medici Filho E, Martins MV, Dos Santos Da Silva MA, Castilho JC, De Moraes LC, Gil CT (2007) Divine proportions and facial aesthetic after manipulation of frontal photographs. World J Orthod 8(2):103–108Google Scholar
- 23.Erbay EF, Canikliogln CM (2002) 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 121(1):85–72Google Scholar
- 24.Johnston DJ, Hunt O, Johnston (1), Burden DJ, Stevensson M, Hepper P. (2005) The influence of lower face vertical proportion on facial attractiveness. Eur J Orthod 27 (4), 349–354Google Scholar
- 26.Mesaros A, Cornea D, Cioara L, Dudea D, Mesaros M, Badea M (2015) Facial attractiveness assessment using illustrated questionnairer. Clujul Med 88(1):73–78Google Scholar
- 27.Rhee SC, Woo KS, Kwon B (2012) Biometric study of eyelid shape and dimensions of different races with references to beauty. Aesthet Plast Surg 36(5):1236–1245Google Scholar
- 28.Mc Curdy JA (2006) Beautiful eyes: characteristics and application to aesthetic surgery. Facial plastic surgery (3):204–214Google Scholar
- 29.Faure JC, Rieffe C, Maltha JC (2002) The influence of different facial components on facial aesthetics. Eur J Orthod 24(1):1–7Google Scholar
- 31.Yu XN, Bai D, Feng X, Lin YH, Chen WJ (2016) Correlation beween cephalometric measures and end-of-treatment facial attractiveness. J Craniofac Surg 27(2):405–409Google Scholar