No abstract

No abstract

Foot length displays a biological correlation with height that suggests the latter might be estimated from foot- or shoeprints when such evidence provides an investigator the best or only opportunity to gauge that aspect of a suspect's physical description. Previous utilization of percentages and linear regressions of foot length to make height estimates is reviewed and appraised, as is such use of shoeprints. Newly determined percentages and linear regressions for determining height from foot length for young adult males and females based upon very large U.S. Army anthropometric databases are presented and evaluated. Suggestions are made for the practical employment of shoeprint length, preferably as a direct measurement but also indirectly as a shoe size indicator, for height assessment.

The use of reported stature, especially self-reported stature such as on a driver's license, as a proxy for measured stature is necessary when measured stature is unavailable, for example, in matching data calculated from skeletal remains with data for missing persons. The accuracy of self-reported stature for older persons and especially for tall and short people is not well ascertained. Examination of published reports provides evidence that beginning at age 45, people compound their stature overestimation by an additional amount related to age (women by twice the amount of men). Analysis of anthropometric data from 8000 U.S. Army personnel indicates that the amount of general overestimation of stature by men is 2 ½ times greater than that by women. Neither tall men nor tall women underestimate their stature, but men in the upper third of the stature range, and women in the upper 10%, self-report their stature with greater accuracy. No trends in accuracy are apparent in the remainder of the stature spectrum for men or women.

No abstract