Body Mass Index and Waist: Hip Ratio are Not Enough to Characterise Female Attractiveness

Abstract

The assessment of characteristic body features of Miss Poland beauty contest finalists compared with the control group, can contribute to recognising the contemporary ideal of beauty promoted by the mass media. The studies of Playboy models and fashion models conducted so far have been limited to the following determinants of attractiveness: body mass index, waist:hip ratio, and waist:chest ratio, which only partially describe the body shape. We compared 20 body features of the finalists of Miss Poland 2004 beauty contest with those of the students of Medical Academy in Bydgoszcz. Discriminant analysis showed that the thigh girth-height index, waist: chest ratio, height, and body mass index had the greatest discrimination power distinguishing the two groups. A model of Miss Poland finalists figure assessment is presented which allows one to distinguish super-attractive women from the control group.

What Makes Jessica Rabbit Sexy? Contrasting Roles of Waist and Hip Size

“…The preeminent role of waist size in female attractiveness is consistent with findings from the relatively few studies that have considered it as a separate variable (Brody, 2004;Brody & Weiss, 2013;Brooks et al, 2010Brooks et al, , 2015Crossley et al, 2012;Forestell et al, 2004;Grundl et al, 2009;Horvath, 1981;Pokrywka et al, 2006;Prantl & Grundl, 2011;Rilling et al, 2008;Rozmus-Wrzesinska & Pawlowski, 2005). In particular, it is congruent with the findings of Brooks, Shelly, Jordan, and Dixson (2015) who found that waist size was the parameter that changed the most as participants in a selection experiment ''evolved'' figures with increasing attractiveness.…”

“…However, the measurements of beauty contestants, which are verified, are remarkably similar to those of Playmates (Hong et al, 2009;Pokrywka et al, 2006;Singh, 1993a).…”

Assessment of Waist-to-Hip Ratio Attractiveness in Women: An Anthropometric Analysis of Digital Silhouettes

“…Because the middle value of the WHR scale (.60–.85) was .725, and the average WHR for young Polish women is equal to or only slightly higher than this (Jasieńska et al, 2004; Pawłowski & Grabarczyk, 2003; Pokrywka, Čabrić, & Krakowiak, 2006), we tested whether the most preferred values differed significantly from .725. According to the one-sample t test, only values for Color18, t (39) = 3.12, p  = .003, and Color21 series, t (39) = 2.53, p  = .015, differed significantly from and was lower than .725.…”

“…This difference amounts to .04, which is about 1 SD (Pawłowski & Grabarczyk, 2003; Pokrywka et al, 2006) and means, for example, that a woman with WHR of .70 would possess the width-based WHR of about .66. The factor of 1.055 provided by Smith et al (2007) leads to very similar conclusions (.66 × 1.055 = .70).…”

Cultural significance of leg‐to‐body ratio preferences? Evidence from Britain and rural Malaysia

“…Much scholarly work has focused, for example, on the relative importance of body shape and weight to women's physical attractiveness (for reviews, see Swami & Furnham, 2006, 2007; Swami, 2006, 2007). However, body size alone does not sufficiently define the ideal female body, and other body proportion measures may also be important (Pokrywka, Čabrić, & Krakowiak, 2006).…”