Changes in the African American female profile as depicted in fashion magazines during the 20th century

American Journal of Orthodontics and Dentofacial Orthopedics

Volumn 125, Issue 4, 2004, Pages 407-417

  Yehezkel, Shaul ^a,b   Turley, Patrick K ^a  

^a Irvine Pediat Dent Orthodontics ^*

^b Irvine Pediat Dent Orthodontics   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

AFRICAN AMERICAN; ANALYSIS OF VARIANCE; ARTICLE; CEPHALOMETRY; CHIN; COMPARATIVE STUDY; CONTROLLED STUDY; ESTHETICS; FACE; FACE PROFILE; FEMALE; HUMAN; LIP; LITERATURE; NOSE; NOSE APEX; PHOTOGRAPHY;

EID: 1842531315     PISSN: 08895406     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.ajodo.2003.05.007     Document Type: Article

References (38)

1. Olds C. Facial beauty in Western art. McNamara J.A. Jr. Esthetics and the treatment of facial form. Monograph 28, Craniofacial Growth Series. 1992;7-25 Center for Human Growth and Development; University of Michigan, Ann Arbor.
2. Farkas L.G., Hreczko T.A., Kolar J.C., Munro I.R. Vertical and horizontal proportions of the face in young adult North American Caucasians revision of neoclassical canons. Plast Reconstr Surg. 75:1985;328-337.
3. Farkas L.G., Sohn T.P., Kolar J.C., Katic M.J., Munro I.R. Inclinations of the facial profile art versus reality. Plast Reconstr Surg. 75:1985;509-519.
4. Farkas L.G., Kolar J.C. Anthropometrics and art in the aesthetics of women's faces. Clin Plast Surg. 14:1987;599-616.
5. Hall D., Taylor R.W., Jacobson A., Sadowsky P.L., Bartolucci A. The perception of optimal profile in African Americans versus white Americans as assessed by orthodontists and the lay public. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 118:2000;514-525.
6. Bell R., Kiyak H.A., Joondeph D.R., McNeill R.W., Wallen T.R. Perceptions of facial profile and their influence on the decision to undergo orthognathic surgery. Am J Orthod. 88:1985;323-332.
7. Auger T.A., Turley P.K. The female soft tissue profile as presented in fashion magazines during the 1900s a photographic analysis. Int J Adult Orthod Orthognath Surg. 14:1999;7-18.
8. Sutter R.E. Jr, Turley P.K. Soft tissue evaluation of contemporary Caucasian and African American female facial profiles. Angle Orthod. 68:1998;487-496.
9. Nguyen D.D., Turley P.K. Changes in the Caucasian male facial profile as depicted in fashion magazines during the twentieth century. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 114:1998;208-217.
10. Burstone C.J. The integumental profile. Am J Orthod. 44:1958;1-25.
11. Schneideman G.B., Bell W.H. The short face syndrome. Am J Orthod. 78:1980;404-420.
12. Opdebeeck H., Bell W.H. The short face syndrome. Am J Orthod. 73:1978;499-510.
13. Bhatia S.N., Leighton B.C. A manual of facial growth. 1993;10-15 Oxford University Press, Oxford.
14. Chaconas S.J. A statistical evaluation of nasal growth. Am J Orthod. 56:1969;403-407.
15. Chaconas SJ. Orthodontics. PSG Publishing Company; 1980. p. 37-45
16. Alkek D.S. Lip augmentation with silicone. J Dermatol Surg Oncol. 17:1991;747-748.
17. Chaconas S.J., Bartroff I.D. Prediction of normal soft tissue changes. Angle Orthod. 45:1975;12-25.
18. Steiner C.C. The use of cephalometrics as an aid to planning and assessing orthodontic treatment. Am J Orthod. 46:1960;721-735.
19. Ricketts R.M. Esthetics, environment, and the law of lip relation. Am J Orthod. 54:1968;272-289.
20. Null G. Black Hollywood the Negro in motion pictures. 1977;Citadel Press, Secaucus, NJ.
21. Peck H., Peck S. A concept of facial esthetics. Angle Orthod. 40:1970;285-318.
22. Foster E.J. Profile preferences among diversified groups. Am J Orthod. 43:1973;34-40.
23. Farrow A.L., Zarrinnia K., Azizi K. Bimaxillary protrusion in black Americans - an esthetic evaluation and the treatment considerations. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop. 104:1993;240-250.
24. Martin J.G. Racial ethnocentrism and judgment of beauty. J Soc Psychol. 63:1964;59-63.
25. Thomas R.G. An evaluation of the soft tissue facial profile in the North American black woman. Am J Orthod. 76:1979;84-94.
26. Goehring J. Modern standards of beauty: nature or nurture? An evolutionary perspective. Origin; 1999; available at www.beautyworlds.com
27. The American Academy of Facial Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery. Statistics on trends in facial plastic surgery. Alexandria (Va): AAFPRS; 2001
28. Bull R., Rumsey N. The social psychology of facial appearance. 1988;Springer-Verlag, New York.
29. Miller A. The role of physical attractiveness in impression formation. Psychonom Sci. 19:1970;241-243.
30. Thornton B., Linnstaedter L. The influence of physical attractiveness and sex-role congruence on interpersonal attraction. Representative Res Soc Psychol. 11:1980;55-63.
31. Marks G., Miller N., Maruyama G. Effects of targets' physical attractiveness on assumptions of similarity. J Pers Soc Psychol. 41:1981;198-206.
32. Lucker G.W., Graber L.W., Pietromonaco P. The importance of dentofacial appearance in facial esthetics a signal detection approach. Basic Appl Soc Psychol. 2:1981;261-274.
33. Walster E, Aronson U, Abrahams, Rottman L. Importance of physical attractiveness in dating behavior. J Pers Soc Psychol 1966;4:508-16
34. Dion K.K., Berschied E., Walster E. What is beautiful is good. J Pers Soc Psychol. 24:1972;285-290.
35. Dion K.K. Young children's stereotyping of facial attractiveness. Dev Psychol. 9:1973;183-188.
36. Taylor P.A., Glenn N.D. The utility of education and attractiveness for female status attainment through marriage. Am Sociol Rev. 61:1976;486-498.
37. Linn E.L. Social meanings of dental appearance. J Health Hum Behav. 7:1966;289-295.
38. Patzer G. The physical attractiveness phenomena. 1985;Plenum, New York.