The craniofacial indicators of aggression: a cross-sectional multiparametric anthropometry study

Creative Commons License

Gülcen B., Pelin İ., Özener E. B.

Folia morphologica, vol.80, no.1, pp.55-62, 2021 (SCI-Expanded) identifier identifier identifier

  • Publication Type: Article / Article
  • Volume: 80 Issue: 1
  • Publication Date: 2021
  • Doi Number: 10.5603/fm.a2020.0039
  • Journal Name: Folia morphologica
  • Journal Indexes: Science Citation Index Expanded (SCI-EXPANDED), Scopus, BIOSIS, CINAHL, EMBASE, MEDLINE
  • Page Numbers: pp.55-62
  • Keywords: anthropometry, aggression, craniofacial, anatomy, behaviour, TO-HEIGHT RATIO, FACIAL WIDTH, GENDER-DIFFERENCES, SEXUAL-DIMORPHISM, HUMAN SKULLS, FACES
  • Istanbul University Affiliated: Yes


BACKGROUND: The craniofacial features of a person are unique and critical in the evaluation of age, gender, and ethnicity. The relationships between craniofacial properties and behavioural patterns have been one of the most common research topics. MATERIALS AND METHODS: There are studies on the association of facial width-to- -height ratio (fWHR) and aggressive behaviour in men; however, no consensus has been reached as there are inconsistent study results. Most of the studies focus on measuring the pre-determined fWHR in searching for a link to aggression. As the literature lacks data on the associations of multiple craniofacial ratios and aggression, we aimed to study the correlation of aggressive behaviour and multiparametric anthropometric measurements of the craniofacial region in a study group consisting of university students aging 18-38 years. RESULTS: The aggression questionnaire results showed that male students had statistically higher scores than females in all subdomains, except physical aggression. Anthropometric studies revealed that males had higher mean values of craniofacial dimensions and indices than females, except the frontal height, the total lip height, frontal index, and cranial length-head circumference index. The statistical analyses for correlations showed that frontal, upper facial, and total facial height-facial width indices correlated with general and verbal aggression, frontal and upper facial indices correlated with physical aggression, and upper facial and total facial height-facial width indices correlated with indirect aggression only in males. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that our study represents the first example of an extensive craniofacial anthropometric research that correlates several craniofacial measurements and ratios with various aggression subdomains.