August 20, 2009

Male-female differences in craniofacial dimensions of Koreans

J Craniofac Surg. 2009 Mar;20(2):356-61.

Female-to-male proportions of the head and face in Koreans.

Song WC, Kim JI, Kim SH, Shin DH, Hu KS, Kim HJ, Lee JY, Koh KS.

It is well known that the head and face are smaller in female subjects than in male subjects. However, almost all previous studies have quantified the size difference between female and male subjects as simple numerical values, which might not clarify the difference. The present study evaluated the female-to-male proportions of the head and face so as to clarify the sex-related differences. A total of 1939 female subjects and 1398 male subjects were divided into 3 age groups: young (20-39 y), middle-aged (40-59 y), and elderly (60-79 y). The dimensions were classified into 3 categories: 5 cephalic, 3 frontal facial, and 6 lateral facial. The female-to-male proportions of individual dimensions were compared in the 3 age groups using the following formula: female measurement value x 100/(mean of male measurement value). The female-to-male proportions of the cephalic dimension increased with age, with the female cephalic dimensions overall being about 96% of the male cephalic dimensions. The female-to-male proportions of the frontal facial dimension were constant across the age groups, with the female frontal facial dimensions overall being 95% of the male frontal facial dimensions. The female lateral facial dimension increased markedly from the young to middle-aged group and was constant or decreased slightly from the middle-aged to the elderly group. Overall, the female lateral facial dimensions were approximately 97% of the male lateral facial dimensions. The present study will suggest a new approach to elucidate those sex-related dimensional differences that are characteristic of female and male subjects.


1 comment:

Andrew Lancaster said...

The problem here is a communication problem. The word "race" as used in normal English implies a fixity similar to the word "species" in pre-Darwinian biology. Indeed it is one level down in the supposedly hierarchy of fixed creations. Of course modern biologists laugh at such thinking. For them a race is just a relatively clear inter-breeding sub-population - and if that is the definition then indeed we can all laugh about people concerned with the word "race". But we would take this position only by forgetting that biology took over an "old fashioned" word. Old fashioned people did not just "mis-use" a nice clear biological word. Darwinian biology never needed this word.