不同人群对侧貌审美评价差异的初步研究

发布时间：2018-06-11 14:07

本文选题：面部侧貌 + 审美评价　；参考：《重庆医科大学》2014年硕士论文

【摘要】：目的：研究不同人群对面部侧貌鼻突度、面突度、唇突度的审美评价差异。方法：按照Holdaway软组织测量方法选取侧貌软、硬组织测量值都在中国人正常值范围内的年轻男性和女性各一名，拍摄侧貌照片。 1.使用图像处理技术变化鼻突度，使鼻突度各增加2mm，4mm，6mm，，再各减少2mm，4mm，6mm，加上原图共有男性图片7张，女性图片7张，由41名正畸医生，43名整形医生，41名家长，86名患者，41名普通大众进行美学评分，以研究不同社会身份、不同性别、不同年龄、不同学历人群对鼻突度侧貌审美评价的差异。 2.同样的处理技术改变面突度，使之依次增加4。，8。，12。，16。，再将面突度减小4。，8。，12。，16。，加上原图，得到男性图片9张，女性图片9张，请上述相同的人群进行美学评分，以研究不同社会身份、不同性别、不同年龄、不同学历人群对面突度侧貌审美评价的差异。 3.同样的处理技术改变唇突度，使唇突度各增加2mm，4mm，6mm，再各减少2mm，4mm，6mm，加上原图，各有男性图片7张，女性图片7张，请上述相同的人群进行美学评分，以研究不同社会身份、不同性别、不同年龄、不同学历人群对唇突度侧貌审美评价的差异。结果 1.鼻突度审美评价分析：人们认为男性鼻突度适中（n）得分最高，女性鼻突度偏大（n+6）得分最高；男性和女性的严重鼻部塌陷（n-6）得分最低。不同社会身份人群对男性鼻突度侧貌的评价一致性较好，而对女性鼻突度侧貌的评价有差异：患者家长组和正畸医生组对女性侧貌（n，n+4）的评分显著高于患者组、整形医生组、普通大众组（p0.05）。女性组较男性组对鼻突度增大（n+4）的男性侧貌评分更高（p0.05）。中年组比少年组和青年组对男性和女性侧貌的评分更高（p0.05）。各学历组间对侧貌评价无统计学差异。 2.面突度审美评价分析：男性和女性面型适中（m）的侧貌得分最高，严重的凸面型（m-16）的得分最低。患者家长组对侧貌为明显的凸面型（m+12）或者凹面型（m-8）的评分显著高于其他组（p0.05）。患者家长组和正畸医生组对女性面突度适中（m）的评分显著高于患者组、整形医生组、普通大众组（p0.05）。不同性别组间评分没有统计学差异。中年组较青年组和少年组对男性侧貌（m-8）的评分更高（p0.05），各学历组间对侧貌评价无统计学差异。 3.唇突度评价评价分析:男性和女性的唇突度适中（c）得分最高，唇部明显前突（c+6）得分最低。正畸医生组对男性唇部前突（c+4）的评分显著低于其他组（p0.05），同时患者组评分显著低于患者家长组评分（p0.05）。患者家长组和正畸医生组对女性唇突度适中的侧貌（c）的评分显著高于患者组、整形医生组、普通大众组（p0.05）。与异性相比，男性对唇部中度前突（c+4）的男性侧貌的评分更高（p0.05），而女性对唇部轻度内收（c-2）的男性侧貌的评分更高（p0.05）。中年组比青年组和少年组对女性侧貌（c-4）的评分更高（p0.05）。学历组间评分没有统计学差异。结论：不同社会身份、不同性别、不同年龄人群对鼻突度、面突度、唇突度侧貌审美评价各有差异。不同学历对侧貌审美评价的一致性较好。
[Abstract]:Objective: To study the aesthetic evaluation differences of nasal aspect, facial protrusion and lip protrusion in different groups.
Methods: according to the Holdaway soft tissue measurement method, the lateral appearance of the young male and female in the normal range of the Chinese people's normal range was selected.
1. use the image processing technique to change the nasal process, make the nasal process increase 2mm, 4mm, 6mm, and then reduce 2mm, 4mm, 6mm, plus the original picture, there are 7 male pictures and 7 female pictures, and 41 orthodontics, 43 orthodondists, 41 parents, 86 patients and 41 general public to study different social identities, different sexes, different The difference in aesthetic evaluation of nasal aspect and degree was different among different age groups.
2. the same treatment technology change the surface process, make it increase by 4., 8., 12., 16., and then reduce the surface process by 4., 8., 12., 16., plus the original picture, the male picture 9, and the female picture 9, ask the same crowd to carry on the aesthetic score to study the different social identity, the sex, the age and the different educational background. Differences in evaluation.
3. the same treatment technology change the lip process, make the lip process increase 2mm, 4mm, 6mm, and then reduce 2mm, 4mm, 6mm, plus the original map, each with male pictures 7, female pictures 7, please the same people for aesthetic score, to study the different social identity, different sex, different age, different educated people to the lip process of aesthetic evaluation of the lip appearance of people Difference.
Result
1. aesthetic evaluation analysis of nasal process: people think that the moderate (n) score is the highest, the female nasal inrush (n+6) has the highest score, and the severe nasal collapse (n-6) of male and female is the lowest. The evaluation of the nasal process side appearance of male with different social identity is better, but the evaluation of the nasal process side appearance is different in the female: The score of n (n+4) was higher in the parent group and the orthodontic group than in the patient group, the plastic surgeon group and the general public group (P0.05). The male side score of the female group was higher than that of the male group (n+4) (P0.05). The score of the middle age group was higher than the young group and the young group (P0.05). The scores of the male and female side were higher than those in the young group and the young group (P0.05). There was no statistical difference in the evaluation of the contralateral appearance.
The analysis of the aesthetic evaluation of the 2. faces: the male and female face type (m) had the highest side score, and the serious convex type (M-16) had the lowest score. The scores of the prominent convex surface (m+12) or concave type (M-8) in the parents' group were significantly higher than those of the other groups (P0.05). The parents and orthodontic groups of the patients were evaluated for the moderate (m) of the women (m). The score was significantly higher than that of the patient group, the plastic surgeon group and the general public group (P0.05). There was no statistical difference between the different sex groups. The score of the male side appearance (M-8) was higher in the middle age group than the young group and the juvenile group (P0.05), and there was no statistical difference in the evaluation of the contralateral appearance among the various academic groups.
The evaluation and evaluation of the 3. labial protrusion evaluation: the moderate (c) score was the highest in male and female, and the lower lip protrusion (c+6) was the lowest. The orthodontic group was significantly lower than the other group (P0.05) for male lip protrusion (c+4), and the score of the patient group was significantly lower than that of the parent group (P0.05). The parents and orthodontic groups of the patients were in the female group. The moderate lip appearance (c) score was significantly higher than the patient group, the orthopedics group, the general public group (P0.05). Compared with the opposite sex, men scored higher on the male side of the moderate anterior process (c+4) in the lip (P0.05), while the female scores on the male side appearance of the lip mild adduction (C-2) were higher (P0.05). The middle-aged group was more than the young group and the young group. The C-4 score was higher (P0.05). There was no statistical difference between the education group.
Conclusion: different social identities, different sex and age groups have different aesthetic evaluation on the nasal process, the surface process and the lip process. The aesthetic evaluation of the side appearance of different educational background is better.
【学位授予单位】：重庆医科大学
【学位级别】：硕士
【学位授予年份】：2014
【分类号】：R783.5

【参考文献】