Back to Blog
Oe goldenratio5/20/2023 ![]() Because we were interested in whether there exists an optimal length ratio for each individual face given its unique facial features, participants never judged the relative attractiveness of faces with different facial features. Each face pair remained on display until the participant responded. Participants judged which face in each randomly presented pair appeared more attractive. Note that because each original face had a different face length and different eye-to-mouth distance, the same percentage of eye-to-mouth distance change resulted in different length ratios in each original face.įor each trial, faces were presented side by side on a 51 cm CRT-monitor with a black background at a resolution of 600 × 800 pixels and a distance of 90 cm, with each face in the pair presented once on the right and once on the left to counter balance display location. We repeated this procedure with an additional 9 original Caucasian female faces. Here we used four experiments to obtain the optimal length and width ratios to an individual’s facial attractiveness.Įxample faces with different length and width ratios faces with an average length or width ratio are framed in black. This ratio is henceforth referred to as the width ratio. The other alteration is to change the horizontal distance between the pupils this change alters the ratio between this distance and the face width, which is measured between the inner edges of the ears. The ratio is henceforth referred to as the length ratio. One may alter the vertical distance between the eyes and the mouth this alteration results in a change in the ratio of this distance to the face length, which is measured by the distance between the hairline and the chin. Two types of alterations can be made to the spatial relations between facial features of any individual face. However, no evidence to date has confirmed this suggestion. Together, these findings suggest that any individual’s facial attractiveness can be optimized when the spatial relations between facial features approximate those of the average face. Furthermore, a sufficiently large increase in the distance between the eyes and mouth of an individual face can make the face appear grotesque ( Searcy & Bartlett, 1996). Although there is little support for the golden ratio ( Green, 1995), studies have shown that averaging a group of faces results in a synthetic face more attractive than any of the originals ( Langlois & Roggman, 1990 Rhodes, 2006). ![]() The quest to define facial beauty either by the size or shape of isolated facial features (e.g., eyes or lips) or by the spatial relations between facial features dates back to antiquity, when the Ancient Greeks believed beauty was represented by a golden ratio of 1:1.618 ( Atalay, 2006). Our preference for attractive faces exists from early infancy and is robust across age, gender and ethnicity ( Rubenstein, Langlois & Roggman, 2002). ![]() Humans prefer attractive faces over unattractive ones ( Dion, Berscheid & Walster, 1972 Eagly, Ashmore, Makhijani & Longo, 1991 Griffin & Langlois, 2006).
0 Comments
Read More
Leave a Reply. |