Have a personal or library account? Click to login
Facial aesthetics and the divine proportion: a comparison of surgical and non-surgical Class II treatment Cover

Facial aesthetics and the divine proportion: a comparison of surgical and non-surgical Class II treatment

Open Access
|Dec 2023

References

  1. Downs WB. Variations in facial relationships: their significance in treatment and prognosis. Am J Orthod 1948; 34: 812–40.
  2. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics for you and me. Am J Orthod 1953; 39: 729–55.
  3. Steiner CC. Cephalometrics in clinical practice. Angle Orthod 1959; 29: 8–29.
  4. Tweed CH. Evolutionary trends in orthodontics, past, present, and future. Am J Orthod 1953; 39: 81–108.
  5. Tweed CH. The Frankfort-mandibular incisor angle (FMIA) in orthodontic diagnosis, treatment planning and prognosis. Angle Orthod 1954; 24: 121–69.
  6. Burstone CJ. The integumental profile. Am J Orthod 1958; 44: 1–25.
  7. Ricketts RM. A foundation for cephalometric communication. Am J Orthod 1960; 46: 330–57.
  8. Merrifield LL. The profile line as an aid in critically evaluating facial esthetics. Am J Orthod 1966; 52: 804–22.
  9. Arnett GW, Jelic JS, Kim J, et al. Soft tissue cephalometric analysis: diagnosis and treatment planning of dentofacial deformity. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1999; 116: 239–53.
  10. Riedel RA. Esthetics and its relation to orthodontic therapy. Angle Orthod 1950; 20: 168–78.
  11. Park YC, Burstone CJ. Soft-tissue profile – fallacies of hard-tissue standards in treatment planning. Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop 1986; 90: 52–62.
  12. Holdaway RA. A soft-tissue cephalometric analysis and its use in orthodontic treatment planning. Part I. Am J Orthod 1983; 84:1–28.
  13. Ricketts RM. The biologic significance of the divine proportion and Fibonacci series. Am J Orthod 1982; 81: 351–70.
  14. Ricketts RM. Facial art, the divine proportion and the science of esthetics. In: Provocations and perceptions in cranio-facial orthopedics: Rocky Mountain Orthodontics; 1989; 149–202.
  15. Dunlap RA. The golden ratio and Fibonacci numbers. Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Co. Pty. Ltd; 1997.
  16. Ghyka M. The Geometry of Art and Life. New York: Sheed and Ward; 1946.
  17. Seghers MJ, Longacre JJ, De Stefano GA. The golden proportion and beauty. Plast Reconstr Surg 1964; 34: 382–6.
  18. Kawakami S, Tsukada S, Hayashi H, Takada Y, Koubayashi S. Golden proportion for maxillofacial surgery in Orientals. Ann Plast Surg 1989; 23: 417–25.
  19. Brons R. Facial Harmony. London: Quintessence Books; 1998.
  20. Levin EI. Dental esthetics and the golden proportion. J Prosthet Dent 1978; 40: 244–52.
  21. Heymann HO. The artistry of conservative esthetic dentistry. J Am Dent Assoc 1987; 115: 14–23.
  22. Shoemaker Jr WA, Nestor J. A time to recognize the science in the art of healing. Fla Dent J 1981; 52: 22–3, 46–7.
  23. Ricketts RM. Divine proportion in facial esthetics. Clin Plast Surg 1982; 9: 401–22.
  24. Shell TL, Woods MG. Perception of facial esthetics: a comparison of similar Class II cases treated with attempted growth modification or later orthognathic surgery. Angle Orthod 2003; 73: 365–73.
  25. Phillips C, Tulloch C, Dann C. Rating of facial attractiveness. Community Dent Oral Epidemiol 1992; 20: 214–20.
  26. Kerr WJS, O’Donnell JM. Panel perception of facial attractiveness. Br J Orthod 1990; 17: 299–304.
  27. Ferrario VF, Sforza C, Poggio CE, Colombo A, Tartaglia G. The relationship between facial 3-D morphometry and the perception of attractiveness in children. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 1997;12: 145–52.
  28. Nakajima E, Yanagisawa M. The Japanese sense of beauty and facial proportions. I. The facial characteristics of people with malocclusion. Quintessence Int 1985; 16: 553–7.
  29. Baker BW, Woods MG. The role of the divine proportion in the esthetic improvement of patients undergoing combined orthodontic/orthognathic surgical treatment. Int J Adult Orthodon Orthognath Surg 2001; 16:108–20.
  30. Enlow DH, Hans MG. Essentials of Facial Growth. Philadelphia: Saunders; 1996.
  31. Vargervik K, Harvold EP. Response to activator treatment in Class II malocclusions. Am J Orthod 1985; 88: 242–51.
  32. Fechner GT. Various attempts to establish a basic form of beauty; experimental aesthetics, golden section and square. Translation of chapter XIV of Fechners Vorschule der Aesthetik. Translated by Niemann M, Quehl J and Hoge H. (1997). Empirical Studies of the Arts 1876; 15: 115–30.
  33. Pierce E. Aesthetics of simple forms. Psychol Review 1894; 1: 483–95.
  34. Piehl J. The golden section: The “true” ratio? Percept Mot Skills 1978; 46: 831–4.
  35. Haines TH, Davies AE. The psychology of aesthetic reaction to rectangular forms. Psychol Review 1904; 11: 249–81.
  36. Davis FC. Aesthetic proportion. Am J Psychol 1933; 45: 298–302.
  37. Godkewitsch M. The “Golden section”: an artifact of stimulus range and measure of preference. Am J Psychol 1974; 87: 269–77.
DOI: https://doi.org/10.2478/aoj-2004-0008 | Journal eISSN: 2207-7480 | Journal ISSN: 2207-7472
Language: English
Page range: 51 - 63
Submitted on: Aug 1, 2003
Accepted on: Dec 1, 2003
Published on: Dec 13, 2023
Published by: Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
In partnership with: Paradigm Publishing Services
Publication frequency: 1 issue per year

© 2023 Tracey L. Shell, Michael G. Woods, published by Australian Society of Orthodontists Inc.
This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 License.