4.5 Article

Female eye attractiveness - Where beauty meets science

Journal

JOURNAL OF CRANIO-MAXILLOFACIAL SURGERY
Volume 47, Issue 1, Pages 73-79

Publisher

CHURCHILL LIVINGSTONE
DOI: 10.1016/j.jcms.2018.05.034

Keywords

Eye attractiveness; Female eye; Periorbital attractiveness; Morphometric analysis

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Introduction: While periorbital and -ocular surgery ranks amongst the most frequently performed plastic surgical procedures, only scarce information exists regarding the contributing factors of aging and its systematic anatomic assessment. The presented study, based on measuring distinct physical landmarks, aimed to gather data to provide a foundation of in-depth periorbital analysis in order to more clearly define female eye attractiveness. Methods: 80 probands (age range: 30-50 years, M = 38.4 +/- 6.5 years) were asked to judge 60 standardized high-resolution digital pictures of female eye regions in respect to the perceived age (in years) and attractiveness (7-point Likert scale). All photographs were objectively evaluated and measured utilizing a total of 38 distinct landmarks. The data was analyzed by calculating correlations between relevant measured eye area parameters and mean attractiveness ratings including age estimations. Results: Overall, it was found that several specific eye shape features correlate with attractiveness and perceived age. For instance, large visible height of the iris and large upward and lateral inclination of both eye axis and eyebrows correlated moderately to strongly with attractiveness (p < 0.05). Conclusion: Regarding the female eye, there exist distinct periorbital anatomic features and landmarks which contribute to a youthful appearance and attractiveness. Knowledge regarding these facts may serve as an important guideline for pre- and post-operative patient analysis. (C) 2018 Published by Elsevier Ltd on behalf of European Association for Cranio-Maxillo-Facial Surgery.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available