Perception Of Smile Attractiveness Research Articles

The perception of smile attractiveness according to the degree of training in the field of dental aesthetics

Background: Since ancient times, people have been concerned with the aesthetics and attractiveness of their own person. The present study aims to analyze the beauty of the smile according to the level of training in the field of dental aesthetics of the respondents.; Methods: To test this hypothesis, a questionnaire with 22 questions was applied to which 306 participants voluntarily answered; Results Several variables related to dental aesthetics were analyzed based on digitally modified facial photographs; Conclusions: The study showed that the degree of training of the patients is a factor that influences the perception of the smile.

Knowledge and Attitude Toward Esthetic Dentistry and Smile Perception.

A smile is important in human communication and is increasingly valued in modern society. The perception of smile attractiveness is subjective and depends on many factors. This study aimed to evaluate and compare knowledge and attituderelated to esthetic dentistry in dental students versus dental interns, general dentists, and dental specialists, examine the self-perception of their smile, and identify parameters that influence smile perception. This cross-sectional study was conducted at King Abdulaziz University Dental Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia. Participants included dental students, interns, general practitioners, and specialists. They completed an electronic questionnaire covering demographics, knowledge about esthetic dentistry, attitudes towardsmile perception, and previous dental treatments. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, bivariate analysis, and chi-square tests. A total of 275 individuals participated in our study. The study found that dental students' exposure and awareness of esthetic dentistry topics increased with academic progression. Gender, age, and marital status influenced self-perception and smile evaluation. More females perceived gender as an influencing factor in smile evaluation, while more males believed in the existence of an ideal smile. A substantial portion of the sample had undergone dental treatments, with no significant income-related disparities observed. This study highlights differences in knowledge and attitudes among dental students and professionals. Dental education appears to impact students' exposure to esthetic dentistry concepts. Moreover, gender, age, and marital status influence self-perception and evaluation of others' smiles.

Perception of smile attractiveness among laypeople and orthodontists regarding the buccal corridor space, as it is defined by the eyes. An innovated technique.

To investigate whether there is a relationship between the distance between the iris and pupil with the ideal size of buccal corridors. A full-portrait image of a male Caucasian was used to create a set of 11 digitally modified images with different buccal corridor space. A web-based cross-sectional study was designed and distributed via an online survey to 200 laypeople and 200 orthodontists to assess image attractiveness, using a Visual analogue scale. For the statistical analysis, Wilcoxon signed-rank and Mann-Whitney U tests were used. The significance level was set at p < 0.05. The response rate for laypeople was 70% (n=139), while the rate for orthodontists was 73% (n=146). For the layperson group, the maximum smile attractiveness score was 10% of buccal width reduction, compared to the iris-pupillary distance, while for the orthodontists, it was 20%. The attractiveness of the smile was significantly reduced in both groups when the buccal corridor width was increased in comparison to the iris-pupillary distance. The length between the mesial part of the iris and the distal of the pupil, may constitutes a landmark for the estimation of the desired width of the buccal corridor. Inter iris-pupillary distance can be the starting point in the smile designing process, in order to perform a facial driven selection of buccal corridor size.

Laypersons’ Perception Towards Gummy Smile and Facial Types: Acceptability and Treatment Benefit

Smile aesthetic perceptions could have different impact on orthodontic and prosthodontic treatment management and options to the patient. Objectives: To determine the laypersons’ smile aesthetic perceptions; irrespective of age and gender, of gummy smile and its treatment need and benefit on three different facial types. Methods: Smiling frontal photographs of a male and female subject were altered to simulate three facial types (brachyfacial, mesofacial and dolichofacial) with different levels of gummy smile increase from 2.0mm to 5.0mm. A total of 150 laypersons ranging from 18-45 years old were randomly approached to rate the photographs. Perceptions differences were assessed using visual analog scale for each group. Results: Repeated measure ANOVA was applied and showed that the mean level of attractiveness among three different facial types based on gummy smile levels was not statistically significant. This suggests that the facial type does not influence the laypersons’ ratings on gummy smile level. Further test found that the laypersons perceived 4.0mm gummy smile as borderline attractive while at 5.0mm is considered as unaesthetic. Chi Square test showed that there was statistically significant difference between the treatment need and attractiveness scoring (p=&lt;0.01) whereby the treatment benefit is dependent on attractiveness ratings of gummy smile variables. Conclusion: Different levels of gingival show affect the laypersons’ perception of smile attractiveness, regardless of the facial type. The higher the level of gingival show, as seen in 4-5mm categories is perceived to be unattractive and thus, more likely to benefit from treatment.

I See Faces! A Review on Face Perception and Attractiveness with a Prosthodontic Peek at Cognitive Psychology.

A human face contains a wealth of information about an individual, with which an observer can instinctively make a judgment on the attractiveness of the face. However, despite the profuse literature on facial and smile attractiveness, their origins, determinants, and perceptions remain controversial. The axiom in face processing research is that a face is perceived as an amalgamation of its features, and is referred to as "whole" or "holistic" perception. It is pertinent to the clinician involved in the provision of esthetic restorations to understand this holistic process of face recognition and perception of smile attractiveness. This review paper addresses face recognition and perception of attractiveness by reviewing the holistic perception of faces, including the multidimensional face-space model, and also reviews the smile and facial attractiveness according to the average, multiple motive, and secondary sex characteristics theories.

Aesthetic crown lengthening and lip repositioning surgery: Pre- and post-operative assessment of smile attractiveness.

To assess the effect of aesthetic crown lengthening (ACL) and lip repositioning surgery (LRS) on perception of smile attractiveness. Preoperative and 6-month postoperative smile photographs of ACL- or LRS-treated patients were evaluated by 100 raters (five gender-balanced groups of ten per procedure) of diverse background (dental students, general dentists, periodontists and laypersons with and without any aesthetic concerns about their own smile). Smile attractiveness was rated by visual analogue scale (VAS). Multivariate mixed-effect models were applied to determine the effect of procedure, rater (age, gender and group) and case (gingival display and GD) on smile attractiveness rating. Average preoperative and postoperative VAS scores for ACL patients were 3.8±2.0 and 6.2±1.9, respectively. Corresponding LRS patient values were 4.8±2.0 and 6.4±1.9. Treatment, baseline GD and rater age were significant determinants (p<.001) of smile attractiveness for both procedures. Rater gender was not significant. Rater group was significant (p<.032) only for ACL. Procedure (p<.001), baseline VAS (p<.001), change in GD (p≤.002) and rater age (p≤.017) were significant determinants of smile attractiveness change from preoperative to postoperative. ACL and LRS are two periodontal plastic surgery procedures that deliver significant smile attractiveness improvements, in the eyes of both laypersons and dental professionals.

Perception of smile attractiveness by dentistry professionals, dental students and laypeople before and after esthetic procedures

Dentist community needs to understand the esthetic perception of laypeople and correlate the standards of dental esthetics to avoid unnecessary treatment. Thus, the aim was to compare the perception of smile attractiveness before and after performing esthetic dental procedures by general practitioners (GP), periodontists (P), restorative dentistry (RD), undergraduate students (UGrad), and laypeople (L). Two photographs of smile were taken, before (PSB) and after (PSA) the esthetic dental procedures. Photographs were exposed to 5 groups: GP (n = 20), P (n = 20), RD (n = 20), UGrad (n = 60), and L (n = 20). The smiles were evaluated using the visual scale with scores ranging from 1 (unattractive) to 10 (very attractive). Data were statistically evaluated (Kruskal-Wallis, Dunn, Mann Whitney). The PSA of the esthetic dental procedures was more attractive than PSB (p &lt; 0.05). In PSB, P group presented the lowest values of smile attractiveness scores (p &lt; 0.05). On the other hand, in PSA, RD group attributed lower values (p &lt; 0.05). The perception of smile attractiveness after performing dental procedures was higher than before, and P and RD were more critical in evaluating the smiles before and after treatment, respectively.

DIFFERENCES AMONG THE PERCEPTIONS OF ORTHODONTISTS, PROSTHODONTISTS AND CONSERVATIVE DENTISTRY SPECIALISTS REGARDING BUCCAL CORRIDOR WIDTHS

ABSTRACT&#x0D; BACKGROUND &amp; OBJECTIVE: To find out the optimal ranges of smile attractiveness on basis of different amounts of buccal corridor widths, as judged by Pakistani orthodontists, prosthodontists and conservative dentistry specialists (CDS).&#x0D; METHODOLOGY: Present cross-sectional study was conducted from June 2016 to June 2017. The anterior smiling image of a female model was edited to be converted to 10 images displaying different amounts of buccal corridor width. After informed consent from the subject, different buccal corridors widths images were created at following widths: 0%, 2%, 4%, 6%, 8%, 10%, 12%, 14%, 16%, and 18%. This was followed by measurement of smile attractiveness of these 10 images on a visual analogue scale by 30 evaluators in three groups. Group 1 consisted of 10 CDS, group 2 consisted of 10 prosthodontists and group 3 consisted of 10 orthodontists. The data was collected and scores of smile attractiveness were presented in form of mean and standard deviation for each group. The differences in the three groups regarding perception of smile attractiveness were found out using ANOVA test and Turkey’s post-hoc test was used for multiple comparisons.&#x0D; RESULTS: For group 1, the highest scoring was obtained by image showing 10% buccal corridor width. In group 2, the highest score was by image showing 14% buccal corridor width, whereas in group 3, the highest scoring was showing 12% buccal corridor width. The differences found were statistically insignificant.&#x0D; CONCLUSION: Dental specialty does not affect perception of smile attractiveness. Buccal corridor width greater than 14% should be avoided.

An Evaluation of Factors Involved in Perception of Smile Attractiveness of Static and Dynamic Smile

According to Jackson, the three main objectives of orthodontic treatment are Functional efficiency, Structural balance and aesthetic harmony which is called as Jackson's triad. These prime objectives in orthodontic treatment are directed towards improvement in function, improvement in aesthetics and the maintenance of these improvements

Effect of maxillary incisors, lower lip, and gingival display relationship on smile attractiveness

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of the relationship between maxillary incisors and lower lip in conjunction with the maxillary gingival display on perception of smile attractiveness. The frontal intraoral photograph of ideally aligned teeth was modified using image processing software. Twenty different smiles were obtained with a combination of 10 different maxillary incisor edge-lower lip distances and 10 different maxillary gingival display amounts. Attractiveness of these 20 smiles was evaluated by orthodontists (n=101), dentists (n=107), and laypersons (n=105). Two-way ANOVA was used to compare alterations on smile esthetics, and repeated measures ANOVA was used to evaluate the interaction between the variables. Bonferroni-adjusted pairwise comparisons were applied for determining the differences between the rater groups. Maxillary incisor edge-lower lip distance (P<0.01), maxillary gingival display amount (P<0.001), and rater group (P<0.01) had statistically significant influences on perception of smile attractiveness. Orthodontists prefer to see a minimal amount of mandibular incisor exposure and almost full crowns of maxillary central incisors. Dentists and laypersons are more tolerant of mandibular incisor exposure and maxillary central incisor coverage by the upper lip. None of the rater groups preferred the coverage of maxillary incisor edges or maxillary gingival display. Elimination of maxillary gingival display helps to improve smile attractiveness, whereas the coverage of maxillary incisor edges has a negative influence.

Perception of smile attractiveness among orthodontists, restorative dentists, and laypersons in Saudi Arabia.

Background:A smile is defined as a universal welcome. The perception of smile attractiveness is affected by the persons' social background and their own experiences. The existing literature states that orthodontists, restorative dentists, and laypersons have different opinions.Aims:The aim of this study is to compare the perception of orthodontists, restorative dentists, and laypersons regarding smile esthetics.Materials and Methods:A survey-based study was conducted. The target population was orthodontists, restorative dentists, and laypersons in Saudi Arabia. An electronic survey that included digitally altered photographs representing different smile parameters was designed by an Adobe Photoshop Certified Expert. Participants were asked to choose the most attractive smile in each question.Results:Unilateral changes in the width or length of the central incisors were the least attractive among the three groups. About 38%, 48%, and 41% of the participating orthodontics, restorative dentists, and laypersons, respectively, found that wider buccal corridors were more attractive. Moreover, 27% of the laypersons found the reversed smile arc to be attractive.Conclusion:The tolerance level in evaluating the asymmetry and the width of the buccal corridors was similar for the three groups. Laypersons were less sensitive to the deviations from the ideal in the smile arc and the amount of lower lip coverage of the incisors.Clinical Significance:Understanding the differences in the perception of smile attractiveness among orthodontists, restorative dentists and laypersons will undoubtedly be beneficial in diagnosis, setting treatment objectives and treatment planning.

Perception of smile attractiveness toward various forms of anterior diastemas among undergraduate dental and nondental students: A questionnaire-based study

Background: Smiling is the evident component of facial attractiveness. Midline diastema is considered in some cultures as unattractive and as a malocclusion, especially in Western countries while it is considered as a sign of beauty in Africa and Middle-East. Aim: The aim of this study is to compare the smile attractiveness perception of dental and nondental students toward anterior diastemas and to determine whether all spaces in the esthetic zone are considered unattractive as midline diastema. Materials and Methods: This is a descriptive cross-sectional study conducted among 156 dental and pharmacy students from the University of Medical Sciences and Technology, Sudan, from December 2015 to January 2016. A self-administered questionnaire was distributed to the participants and it consisted of two parts: part one – related to gender, faculty, educational level, and questions about dental diastema, and part two – containing four modified pictures of a young female's smile modified by photoediting software to create different spaces between anterior teeth (midline, Simian, Frush and Fisher, and Lombardi diastema). Participants were asked to rank the pictures according to attractiveness from the most to the least attractive using visual analog scale. Comparison between variables was made by Chi-square test with P Results: Smile attractiveness from the most to the least attractive was Simian > Frush and Fisher > midline > Lombardi among both dental and pharmacy students. Gender and presence of diastema had no relation with the student's perception (P > 0.05). There was a significant statistical difference between dental and pharmacy students regarding Frush and Fisher diastema (P = 0.034). Most of the students with diastema felt shy when smiling. Conclusions: The location and width of diastema had an important role on the attractiveness perception of dental diastemas. Midline diastema was not a gap with the most negative perception.

The impact of occlusal plane cant along with gingival display on smile attractiveness.

To evaluate the influence of occlusal plane cant in conjunction with maxillary gingival display on perception of smile attractiveness by orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons. Faculty of Dentistry at Baskent University. A total of 204 raters for smile attractiveness. A frontal intra-oral photograph of aligned teeth was modified using image processing software. Six different occlusal lines representing 0° to 5° cants were obtained by tilting the photographs. Each occlusal cant was adjusted in five manners resulting in five different gingival display amounts. Attractiveness of the 30 different smiles was evaluated by 204 raters divided into three groups (n = 68 in each group). Both occlusal cant (p < 0.001) and gingival display amount (p < 0.001) had a statistically significant influence on smile attractiveness. Smile attractiveness scores with reference to amount of gingival display showed a significant difference between rater groups (p < 0.001). Orthodontists preferred 1-mm coverage of upper central incisors by the upper lip, whereas dentists and laypersons preferred 2 mm. Significant (p < 0.001) interaction was observed between occlusal cant and gingival display amount, which influenced smile attractiveness. Increase in both occlusal plane cant and gingival display negatively influences smile attractiveness. The influence of occlusal plane cant becomes less when gingival display increases, whereas the influence of gingival display decreases when occlusal cant increases. Dentists are more generous than orthodontists, while laypersons are the most generous regarding smile attractiveness scores.

The perception of smile attractiveness among Saudi population.

Parameters of dental beauty change across time for varying reasons. Thus, an understanding of the factors that help or harm the attractiveness of a smile is an important step in creating attractive smiles. This study aimed to identify factors that affect smile perception and attractiveness among the Saudi population. A cross-sectional study was conducted among the Saudi population. Questionnaires were distributed to 130 dentists and final-year dental students, and to 130 laypersons. The questionnaire contained six smile photographs created by Photoshop® software. There was a statistically significant difference in scale ratings, based on participant background, for the “gummy” smile picture (P-value =0.003), diastema picture (P-value =0.000) and the “Reverse” smile picture (P-value =0.004). As for sex, males significantly underscored the gummy picture (P-value =0.009). Older people accepted the gummy smile less than did younger people, but diastema was considered as one of the variations that spoiled the attractiveness of the smile. “Dental background” participants significantly identified the ideal smile better than the “nondental” group. The perception of diastema as a sign of beauty among Saudi population in the past has definitely changed, according to the results of our study, where diastema and reverse smile received the lowest score in this survey.

Perception of Smile Attractiveness by Laypeople–influence of Profession and Treatment Experience

Aims: To assess the influence of profession, treatment experience, age and gender on the perception of smile aesthetics with different buccal corridors and smile arcs, and to identify the threshold where bucca l corridor space becomes aesthetically displeasing. Study Design: A questionnaire-based descriptive study on the assessment of attractiveness ratings by laypeople. Place and Duration of Study:Amman/Jordan, University of Jordan Hospital; Faculty of Dentistry, Division of Orthodontics, from 2010 -2011. Methodology: A coloured photograph of a female smile was digitally modified to produce six smile images with buccal corridor spaces (BCSs) ranging from 0% to 25% and three smile images with altered smile arcs (consonant, flat and reverse). These images were shown to 104 laypeople who were asked to rate the attractiveness of each smile on a scale of one to ten. Analysis of variance was used to study the effect of age, gender, profession and treatment experience on smile attractiveness rating. A one -way ANOVA post hoc Duncan test was used to establish the threshold where BCS was considered unattractive. Results: The most attractive smile was the broadest and consonant smile (7.42 +/

Influence on smile attractiveness of the smile arc in conjunction with gingival display

Many variables affecting smile esthetics and attractiveness have been evaluated. However, the influence of the interaction of several variables is not as well known. Furthermore, patients and dental professionals might view smile esthetics differently. Therefore, the purpose of this research was to evaluate the influence of the smile arc in conjunction with the amount of maxillary gingival display on the perception of smile attractiveness by orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons. A frontal intraoral photograph of ideally aligned teeth was modified using image-processing software. Photos showing 7 smile arcs, from flat to vaulted, were obtained, and these were combined with photos showing 4 different amounts of maxillary gingival display. The attractiveness of the 28 images of different smiles was evaluated by 3 groups of raters (orthodontists, dentists, and laypersons), each consisting of 70 persons. Both smile arc (P <0.05) and gingival display amount (P <0.001) had statistically significant influences on the perception of smile attractiveness. Smile attractiveness scores with reference to gingival display amount showed a statistically significant (P <0.001) difference between the rater groups. A significant (P <0.05) interaction between smile arc and gingival display amount was observed. Examining other components influencing the perception of smile attractiveness might help clinicians develop more satisfying treatment plans for their patients.

The Perception of Smile Attractiveness

To evaluate the attractiveness of a smile according to variations from esthetic norms, photographic framing, and the order of the presentation of photographs. A photograph of an individual was selected and digitally manipulated to create the following smiles: an ideal control smile (I), a smile with diastema (D1), a smile with midline deviation (LM3), a smile with deviation from the long axes of the lateral incisors (10D), and a smile with an inverted smile arc (LSRV). The manipulated photographs were developed in framings of the face and of the mouth and evaluated by 20 laypeople. For half the evaluators, the presentation started with facial photographs and, for the other half, the presentation began with the mouth shots. Evaluators were asked to rank the photographs from the least to the most attractive; then, each photograph was awarded a mark (scale of 0.0 to 10.0). In both presentations, the smiles I, LM3, 10D, and LSRV received favorable ratings, whereas the D1 smile got poor ratings. The photographic framings used (face vs mouth) and the order of presentation of the photographs did not influence the rankings. The absence of variations from beauty norms of a smile has a positive impact on its esthetic perception, but variations from the norms do not necessarily result in reduced attractiveness.