Skip to main content

Table 3 Inter-group comparisons

From: Evaluation of the relationship between malar projection and lower facial convexity in terms of perceived attractiveness in 3-dimensional reconstructed images

  Overall score (Median (Standard deviation)) p value Bonferroni post hoc p value
Malar position group Protruded Malar (PM) Retruded Malar (RM) Neutral Malar (NM)   PM vs. RM PM vs. NM RM vs. NM
M 9.0 (5.3) 14.0 (6.6) 9.0 (5.5) p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p = 0.545 p < 0.001***
F 9.0 (4.6) 16.0 (7.2) 10.0 (5.9) p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p = 0.542 p < 0.001***
M vs. F p = 0.735 p = 0.003* p = 0.045*     
Jaw position group Protruded Jaws (PJ) Retruded Jaws (RJ) Neutral Jaws (NJ)   PJ vs. RJ PJ vs. NJ RJ vs. NJ
M 15.0 (6.7) 9.0 (5.2) 9.0 (4.5) p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p = 1.000
F 18.0 (7.0) 7.0 (5.1) 10.0 (4.4) p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p < 0.001***
M vs. F p = 0.159 p = 0.987 p = 0.801     
Relative position group Relatively deficient malar (RD) Balanced profiles (BP) Relatively prominent malar (RP)   RD vs. BP BP vs. RP RP vs. RD
M 15.0 (6.2) 9.0 (5.0) 8.0 (4.9) p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p = 0.033* p < 0.001***
F 18.0 (5.4) 9.0 (3.8) 7.0 (4.8) p < 0.001*** p < 0.001*** p = 0.063 p < 0.001***
M vs. F p < 0.001*** p = 0.096 p = 0.162     
  1. M Male subject, F Female subject; all comparisons were Bonferroni-adjusted; * p < 0.05, *** p < 0.001