J. Orthod.
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Right arrow Citation Map
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kerr, W. J.
Right arrow Articles by O'Donnell, J. M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kerr, W. J.
Right arrow Articles by O'Donnell, J. M.

British Journal of Orthodontics, Vol 17, 299-304, Copyright © 1990 by British Orthodontic Society

ARTICLES

Panel perception of facial attractiveness

WJ Kerr and JM O'Donnell
Department of Orthodontics, Glasgow Dental Hospital and School.

The full-face and profile photographic transparencies of 60 subjects (30 male, 30 female) divided equally among Angles Class I, Class II Division 1, and Class III malocclusions, taken before and after orthodontic treatment, were randomly distributed in projector carousels and shown to four panels consisting of orthodontists, dental students, art students, and the parents of children undergoing orthodontic treatment. The faces were rated according to the method of Lundstrom et al. (1987). Full-face views generally were rated more attractive than profile views and Class II and Class III malocclusion subjects were rated lower than Class I malocclusion subjects. While the art student and parent panels were less critical in their appraisal of facial attractiveness, they were less sensitive to the changes brought about by orthodontic treatment than the orthodontist and dental student panels, although all could appreciate an improvement in the Class II Division 1 group.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
R. M. A. Kiekens, J. C. Maltha, M. A. van 't Hof, H. Straatman, and A. M. Kuijpers-Jagtman
Panel perception of change in facial aesthetics following orthodontic treatment in adolescents
Eur J Orthod, April 1, 2008; 30(2): 141 - 146.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
A. M. Hamdan, I. K. Al-Omari, and Z. B. Al-Bitar
Ranking dental aesthetics and thresholds of treatment need: a comparison between patients, parents, and dentists
Eur J Orthod, August 1, 2007; 29(4): 366 - 371.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of the American Dental AssociationHome page
G. R. Samorodnitzky-Naveh, S. B. Geiger, and L. Levin
Patients' satisfaction with dental esthetics
J Am Dent Assoc, June 1, 2007; 138(6): 805 - 808.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
R. Kiekens, M. van 't Hof, H Straatman, A. M. Kuijpers-Jagtman, and J. Maltha
Influence of panel composition on aesthetic evaluation of adolescent faces
Eur J Orthod, February 1, 2007; 29(1): 95 - 99.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Eur J OrthodHome page
R. M. A. Kiekens, J. C. Maltha, M. A. van 't Hof, and A. M. Kuijpers-Jagtman
A measuring system for facial aesthetics in Caucasian adolescents: reproducibility and validity
Eur J Orthod, December 1, 2005; 27(6): 579 - 584.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Journal of the American Dental AssociationHome page
J. D. SHULMAN, G. MAUPOME, D. C. CLARK, and S. M. LEVY
Perceptions of desirable tooth color among parents, dentists and children
J Am Dent Assoc, May 1, 2004; 135(5): 595 - 604.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1990 British Orthodontic Society.