Volunteer sample of African American women (N=108), aged 18 through 30 years, with African American parents and no previous facial surgery or trauma.Intervention: Photographs and 16 standard anthropometric measurements were taken in concordance with the 9 neoclassical canons. Results were compared with the North American white standard and the neoclassical canons, and an intragroup evaluation was performed. One-way analysis of variance, 99.7% confidence intervals, and t tests were used to test differences for significance.Main Outcome Measures: Anthropometric measures.Results: Compared with white women, the following measurements were found to be significantly different (PϽ.003) in African American women: special head height was shorter; forehead height II was longer; nose length was shorter; lower face height was longer; height of the calva was shorter; forehead height I was longer; and ear length was shorter. In addition, most horizontal measures were wider, ie, eye-fissure width, nasal width, mouth width, and facial width. The nose and ear have greater angles of inclination. Of the 9 neoclassical canons, the orbital proportion was found to include the most proportional subjects (30.6%), followed by the nasoaural proportion (13.0%) and the nasofacial proportion (9.3%). Subcategorization based on nasal dorsal height yielded the most significantly different measures.Conclusions: African American female facial anthropometric measures, especially those of the horizontal dimension, differ significantly from those of young white subjects. The average African American woman does not fit the neoclassical standard of facial proportion.

To determine the average facial proportions of the African American man and compare results with the neoclassical canons of facial proportions and the standard for the North American white man.Design: Cross-sectional survey.Methods: Photographs and anthropometric measurements of the face were taken of 109 men of African American descent aged between 18 and 30 years, and results were compared with the neoclassical canons of the facial proportion and the averages of the anthropometric measurements for the North American white man. Proportional relationships were calculated based on the averages. Statistical analysis was performed. Results:The neoclassical canons of facial proportion were not found to be applicable to most of the African American men who participated in the study. Of the 24 anthropometric measurements obtained, 21 were significantly different from the measurements of the North American white man (PϽ.05). We present proportional relationships in our subjects. Conclusions:The face of the average African American man differs from the neoclassical canons of facial proportion and the averages of anthropometric measurements for the North American white man. The proportional relationships found in our subjects might serve as a template for facial analysis in this patient population.

The African American nose has been broadly classified as ethnic yet it differs significantly in morphology from that of other ethnic groups with which it is categorized. The objectives of this study were to (1) establish an objective protocol for analysis of the African American female nose using anthropometric measurements, and (2) determine whether subjective subcategorization schemes are a reliable replacement for anthropometry. African American women (n = 107) between the ages of 18 and 30 years consented to participate in this study. Photographs and 14 standard anthropometric measurements were taken of the face and nasal region, including nose length, nose width, special upper face height, intercanthal distance, mouth width, nasal bridge inclination, nasal tip protrusion, ala thickness, nasal root width, nasal bridge length, tangential length of ala, length of columella, nasofrontal angle, and nasolabial angle. Nasal indices including nose width-nose height index, nasal tip protrusion-nose height index, and nasal tip protrusion-nasal width index were calculated. In addition, photographic analysis was performed to evaluate nostril shape, nasal base shape, and nasal dorsal height. Proportional relationships and subcategorization schemes were evaluated. A new method of nasal analysis for the African American woman uses the proportional relationships of the anthropometric measurements. Proportional relationships included a columellar to lobule ratio of 1.5:1, a nasolabial angle of 86 degrees, and an alar width to intercanthal distance ratio of 5:4. The nasal dorsal height classification scheme was the most reliable for subjective analysis. The degree of variability found within this group of young African American women is illustrated by the following indices and their respective ranges: nose width-nose height index mean, 79.7 (range, 57 to 102); nasal tip protrusion-nose height index mean, 33.8 (range, 23 to 46); and nasal tip protrusion-nose width index mean, 42.8 (range, 32 to 61). The guidelines provided are a baseline from which to begin analysis and evaluation.