Shuttleworth 1938

Sexual Maturation and the Skeletal Growth of Girls Age Six to Nineteen
Author(s): Frank K. Shuttleworth

Source: Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development, Vol. 3, No. 5, Sexual
Maturation and the Skeletal Growth of Girls Age Six to Nineteen (1938), pp. i+iii-vii+1-56
Published by: Wiley on behalf of the Society for Research in Child Development
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/1165443
Accessed: 04-04-2015 12:28 UTC
REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
http://www.jstor.org/stable/1165443?seq=1&cid=pdf-reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of content
in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms of scholarship.
For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Wiley and Society for Research in Child Development are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to
Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 128.114.34.22 on Sat, 04 Apr 2015 12:28:37 UTC
All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Sexual Maturation and the Skeletal Growth
of Girls Age Six to Nineteen
By
FRANK K. SHUTTLEWORTH
Institute of Human Relations
Yale University
MONOGRAPHS OF THE SOCIETY FOR RESEARCH IN
CHILD DEVELOPMENT
VOLUMEIII, No. 5 (SERIAL

No. 18)
Published by
SOCIETY FOR RESEARCH IN CHILD DEVELOPMENT
NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL
Washington, D. C.
1938
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The writer desires to express once more his deep
indebtedness to Mark A. May, Director of the Institute
of Human Relations, for his continued interest and
generous financial support of these studies of the growth
patterns of girls during the second decade of life.
Once more, also, the writer is indebted to Professor
Walter F. Dearborn for making available data col-
lected by the Harvard Growth Study. Mrs. Mary
Colton Ingham and Mr. Arthur O. Baggarly have as-
sumed a progressively larger share of the responsibility
for the statistical analysis and for the construction of
charts. Their labors have been indispensable. The
Works Progress Administration of Connecticut (Project
465-15-3-12) provided essentially all of the clerical
assistance so essential to the detailed statistical treat-
ment of the data.
CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES ...................................... iv
LIST OF FIGURES ........................................ v
Chapter
I. THE PROBLEM ........................................ 1
II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDS, ORIGINAL DATA, AND

PROCEDURES ................................................. 6
1. Historical Backgrounds ................................. 6
2. Sources of Original Data .............................. 7
3. Methods of Measurement and Reliabilities of
Original Measurements ............................... 8
4. Corrections for Distortion ............................... 9
5. Procedures ........................................ 12
III. GROWTH TRENDS IN AVERAGE SIZE OF EARLY,

MIDDLE, AND LATE MATURING GROUPS OF GIRLS
IN RESPECT TO TWELVE BONY DIMENSIONS OF THE
HAND AND WRIST ........................................... 17
IV. PATTERNS OF GROWTH REVEALED BY ANNUAL IN-

CREMENTS OF EARLY, MIDDLE AND LATE MATUR-
ING GROUPS OF GIRLS ..................................... 28
V. CONTRASTING GROWTH PATTERNS OF THE TWELVE

MEASUREMENTS ............................................. 40
VI. SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATIONS .................... 52
LITERATURE CITED ......................................... 55
iii
LIST OF TABLES
Table Page
1. Reliability of the Original Measurements .................... 9
2. Amount of Distortion in Increments at Ages 13.0, 13.5,

14.0, and 14.5; Weighted Corrections; and Relative
Importance .............................................. ... 11
3. Growth Trends in Average Size of Twelve Skeletal

Dimensions, Millimeters, of Three Groups of Girls
Menstruating at Different Ages and of Sub-populations
Measured Approximately at Birthdays. and the Half-
yearly Anniversaries of Birthdays ........................ 14
4. Generalized Patterns of Growth in Average Size ............. 15
5. Standard Deviations in Millimeters of Gross Figures and

of Increments .............................................. 16
6. Differentiation in Average Size According to Menarcheal

Age (a) in Terms of Contrasts Between Extreme
Groups and (b) in Terms of Correlations ................ 20
7. Correlations of Menarcheal Age with Growth Increments for

the Years Ending at Selected Ages ........................ 29
8. Ages at First and Second Inflection Points as Shown by

Generalized Patterns of Increments and Relative Growth
R ates ......................................................... 46
iv
LIST OF FIGURES
Figures Page
1. Growth trends in average skeletal age of three groups

of girls menstruating at different ages ................... 2
2. Average annual increments in skelet;l age of three

groups of girls menstruating at different ages .......... 3
3. Growth trends in average "ossification sums" of three

groups of girls menstruating at different ages .......... 4
4. Average annual increments shown by "ossification sums"

of three groups of girls menstruating at different ages .. 5
5. Generalized patterns of average annual increments in the

navicular and first metacarpal length before and after
correction for distortion .......................... 13
6. X-ray illustrating the twelve measurements ................ 18
7. Growth trends in average first metacarpal length (above)

8. Growth trends in average fifth metacarpal length (below)

of three groups of girls menstruating at different ages ... 22
9. Growth trends in average first metacarpal transverse

distal diameter (above) of three groups of girls
menstruiating at different ages ............................ 23
10. Growth trends in average first metacarpal transverse

proximal diameter (below) of three groups of girls
menstruating at different ages ............................ 23
11. Growth trends in average fifth metacarpal transverse

menstruating at different ages ............................. 24
12. Growth trends in average fifth metacarpal transverse
13. Growth trends in average greater multangular diameter
(above) of three groups of girls menstruating at dif-
ferent ages ................................................... 25
14. Growth trends in average capitate diameter (below) of
three groups of girls menstruating at different ages ..... 25
15. Growth trends in average triquetrum diameter (above)
of three groups of girls menstruating at different ages .... 26
Figure Page
16. Growth trends in average lunate diameter (below) of
17. Growth trends in average navicular diameter (above)
18. Growth trends in average radial epiphysis diameter (be-
low) of three groups of girls menstruating at different
ages ........................................ 27
19. Average annual increments in first metacarpal length

ferent ages ........................................... 30
20. Average annual increments in fifth metacarpal length
(below) of three groups of girls menstruating at dif-
ferent ages ....................................... 30
21. Average annual increments in first metacarpal transverse
menstruating at different ages ........................... 31
23. Average annual increments in fifth metacarpal transverse

24. Average annual increments in fifth metacarpal transverse
25. Average annual increments in greater multangular diameter
ferent ages ............ 33
................................
26. Average annual increments in capitate diameter (below)
27. Average annual increments in triquetrum diameter (above)
of three groups of girls menstruating at different ages .... 34
28. Average annual increments in lunate diameter (below) of
29. Average annual increments in navicular diameter (above)
30. Average annual increments in radial epiphysis diameter
(below) of three groups of girls menstruating at dif-
ferent ages ............................................. 35
vi
Figure Page
31. Average annual increments in first metacarpal length, fifth
metacarpal length, and first metacarpal transverse distal
diameter of three groups of girls arranged so that correspond-
ing points on the pattern of growth are in the same vertical
line .............................................................. 36
proximal diameter, fifth metacarpal transverse distal
diameter, and fifth metacarpal transverse proximal diameter
of three groups of girls arranged so that corresponding
points on the pattern of growth are in the same vertical
line .................... ...a .... ........................... ..... 37
33. Average annual increments in greater multangular diameter,

capitate diameter, and triquetrum diameter of three groups
of girls arranged so that corresponding points on the pattern
of growth are in the same vertical line ...................... 38
34. Average annual increments in lunate diameter, navicular
diameter and radial epiphysis diameter of three groups of
girls arranged so that corresponding points on the pattern
of growth are in the same vertical line .................... 39
35. Generalized patterns of annual increments in six skeletal di-
mensions which show intense growth prior to the final
decelerating phase ..................a....... ................... 41
36. Generalized patterns of annual increments in six skeletal
dimensions which show less intense growth prior to the
final decelerating phase ....................................... 42
37. Generalized patterns of annual increments in six skeletal
dimensions illustrating extreme contrasts .................... 43
38. Generalized patterns of annual increments in sitting height,
leg length, iliac diameter, chest breadth, chest depth,
and body weight ..................... ......................... 44
39. Generalized patterns of annual increments in twelve skeletal
dimensions plotted to the same arithmetic scale ............ 47
40. Percentage rates of growth per year shown by generalized pat-
terns of navicular diameter, greater multangular diameter,
lunate diameter, triquetrum diameter and sitting height ... 48
terns of body weight, fifth metacarpal transverse distal diameter,
triquetrum diameter, capitate diameter, and sitting height .. 49
42. Percentage rates of growth per year shown by generalized
patterns of first metacarpal transverse proximal diameter,
radial epiphysis diameter, first metacarpal length, fifth
metacarpal length, and sitting height ....................... 50
terns of four metacarpal transverse diameters, leg length,
and sitting height .............. ................. .......... 51
vii
CHAPTER I
THE PROBLEM
The writer has elsewhere presented in some detail the results of a

study of the physical growth of girls age six to nineteen in relation to
the early or late advent of the first menstruation or menarche (26).1
The original data consisted of measurements repeated annually from five
to twelve years on a group of 248 girls selected from records of the
Harvard Growth Study (11). This population was divided into eight
groups according to menarcheal age. Growth trends, both in terms of
average size and of annual increments, were presented for standing height,
sternal height, sitting height, leg length, chest breadth, chest depth,
iliac diameter, body weight, erupted teeth, and skeletal age. With the
exception of data for erupted teeth, all of these measurements showed
striking contrasts between early and late menstruating groups. At age
eleven and twelve Group A (menstruating before age 11-6) averaged
12 per cent bigger in linear measurements and 50 per cent heavier than
Group H (menstruating after age 14-5). In Group A accelerated growth
began at approximately age 9.0 and reached the peak of its accelerating
phase between age 10.5 and 11.5 while in Group H accelerated growth
began at approximately age 12.0 and reached the peak of its accelerating
phase between age 13.5 and 14.5. These contrasts were attributed to
underlying endocrine factors on the assumption that the pituitary initiated
both accelerated physical growth and the process of sexual maturation at
approximately the same time in a given individual but as early as age
nine or as late as age twelve in different individuals.
Similarly striking contrasts were presented for growth in skeletal age
as estimated from X-rays of the hand and wrist, but the arbitrary
nature of the units of measurement obscured the true nature of the growth
pattern. Skeletal ages of 60 and 120 mon'ths, for example, were defined
in the Harvard records as the stages of development typical of girls age
60 and 120 months. Since development is complete in the typical girl of
197 months, the maximum skeletal age was defined as 197 months. It
follows from these definitions that the growth curve for girls in general
must be a straight line from birth to age 197 months at which point
growth must abruptly cease. Under these conditions contrasts between
early and late maturing groups of girls can only indicate that their growth
patterns are different, while completely concealing the true nature of the
differences. The present monograph is devoted to elucidating the true
nature of these differences.
The importance of this problem may be illustrated by Figures 1, 2,
3, and 4. Figure 1 presents growth trends in average skeletal age of
early, middle, and late maturing groups of girls who menstruated before
age 12-6, between 12-6 and 13-5, and after age 13-5. It will be
noted that the curves for all three groups up to age fourteen are close
approximations to straight lines as, indeed, they must be from the defini-
tion of skeletal age. Further, all three groups attain exactly the same
final level at maturity as, indeed, they must from the fact that mature
skeletal development is defined for all as 197 months. It is clear, never-
theless, that the early maturing group is developing more rapidly to age
1Special students of this earlier monographshould note that basic data in Tables
16, 18, and 23 contain a uniform error In arrangement. In each case data for Groups
EY, FY, GY, and HYare printed one space too high in the table.
thirteen and less rapidly after age thirteen than the late maturing group.
What is not clear is the nature of the units of growth from year to year
since by definition the average girl must add twelve months of skeletal
205 ...
1BS -
/65
/45_
S/35
85- 1MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

------ MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5
- MENARCHEI AFTER 13-5
75
1 ..
6.0 70 8.0 9.0 /0.0 /10 /2.0 /3.0 4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7 8.0/9.0
Fig.1. Growth
trends
ing at different ages.
inaverage
skeletal
ageofthree groupsgirlsmenstruat- of
age between age six and seven and between age fifteen and sixteen.
Figure 2 presents the corresponding annual increments.
Figures 3 and 4 give a much closer approximation to the true growth
trends of the hand and wrist as determined from X-rays. These "ossi-
fication sums" were abstracted from a doctoral dissertation by West(29,
30), and consist of the unweighted sum of twelve linear measurements
taken from X-rays of the right hand on 104 cases. There are serious
difficulties with these data to be considered in a moment but, in com-
parison with estimated skeletal ages, they have the very great merit of
representing true linear units of growth throughout the age range. In
addition to the facts shown by Figures 1 and 2, Figures 3 and 4 reveal
a distinctive growth pattern with initial decelerating, markedly accelerat-
- 2 SLG
20
0 -
- MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
6.0 70 8.0 9.0 /0.0 1.O /2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /700 8.0 19.0
YEARS ENDING AT INDICATED AGES
Fig. 2. Average annual increments in skeletal age of three groups of girls men-
struating at different ages.
ing, and abruptly decelerating phases occurring in serial order for the
three groups of girls. The pattern is strongly suggestive of similar
patterns for standing height and sitting height. Whereas, Figure
2 suggests that skeletal development of the hand and wrist proceeds
at a moderate and uniform rate to age fifteen or sixteen and then be-
gins to slow down, Figure 4 shows that the most intense growth occurs
at ages eleven and twelve and thereafter slows down abruptly.
By contrast with Figures 1 and 2, Figures 3 and 4 illustrate the
great importance of proper units of measurement in studying growth and
development. The estimated skeletal ages are entirely satisfactory for
the purpose of cross-sectional and correlational studies, but they are
wholly inadequate for longitudinal and developmental studies. The ossi-
fication sums of West provide better longitudinal data but introduce other
difficulties which are just as serious in that they consist of the unweighted
sums of twelve individual measurements. That is, physical growth trends
analogous to the skeletal growth trends of Figures 3 and 4 would have
to be constructed from the sum of standing height plus arm span plus
chest depth plus iliac diameter plus head length plus and so forth for
twelve physical measurements. The obvious need is for an analysis of
the growth trends of each of the twelve individual measurements. The
body of this monograph, Chapters III to V, is devoted to this analysis.
Chapter II sketches the historical backgrounds which provided the original
data, discusses the reliability of these data, considers distortion factors,
outlines procedures, and presents tables of basic data showing growth
trends of early, middle, and late maturing groups of girls.
9 5
285
275
265
255
245
2935
2
225 /
CI2/5t---
205
195
185-
175-MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5
---M MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
165S-
15 t
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /00 /1.0 /2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 7.0 /8.0 /90
AGES
Fig. 3. Growthtrends in average Iossification sums' of three groups of girls

menstruating at different ages.
S20- 2 SLG -
5
II- - F,• / ....
Ot
1 \
MENARCHE12-6 TO 13 -5
MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
6.o0 7 8.0 9.0 I0.0 I.0 /2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7.0 /8.0 /9.0
YEARS END/NG AT INDICATED AGES
Fig. 4. Average annual increments shown by "ossification sums" of three groups of

girls mnstruating at different ages.
CHAPTER II
HISTORICALBACKGROUNDS,ORIGINALDATA, AND PROCEDURES
1. Historical Backgrounds
The original data of the present study have an historical background
which needs to be briefly sketched and which is of interest on its own
account as an illustration of the devious paths by which science progresses.
It is not necessary to review the literature since this has been done very
recently in this monograph series by Flory (12).
Systematic studies of skeletal development in the living child began
to appear almost immediately after the discovery of the X-ray by Roentgen
in 1895. During the following decade the problem was one of descriptive
anatomy significant on the one hand for the understanding of child growth
and on the other for the practical concerns of clinical, pathological, and
forensic medicine. A series of papers by Rotch (17, 18, 19, 20, 21,
and 22) beginning in 1908 attributed large educational significance to
skeletal development and profoundly altered the course of later research
in America. A pressing problem at that time was the discovery of some
criterion, other than mere chronological age, for the educational classifica-
tion of school children. The problem was acute since psychologists be-
ginning with Cattell (5) in 1896 had failed to find significant relation-
ships between educational progress and such tests as sensory acuity,
weight discrimination, etc. Rotch advocated school grading by anatomical
age determined from X-rays of the carpal bones. Antedating Rotch by
a year, Crampton (7, 8, 9, and 10) had attacked the same problem
advocating, instead, educational classification by physiological age as
indicated by pubic hair. The true key to the problem was already
available in 1905, but in an almost unnoticed article by Binet and Simon
(3). Surely, no one at that time could have predicted the future careers
of these three proposals! The rapid development of intelligence testing
should have put an end to the practicality of the original proposals of
Crampton and Rotch. Curiously enough, Crampton, with his emphasis
on the fundamentally important phenomenonof sexual maturation, has
been undeservedly neglected these thirty years, whereas, Rotch has sur-
vived to plague scores of students with the laborious, expensive and
fruitless search for psychological, educational and vocational correlations
with carpal development. From the first this search for practical corre-
lates has been handicapped by the difficulty of quantifying the exceed-
ingly complex data yielded by a series of X-rays. The merits of the
long and controversial literature on the best method of quantification are
not germane to the present study. Rather, this problem is relevant be-
cause it quite unintentionally provided basic data which are well adapted
to the special needs of this study.
Five methods of quantifying X-rays of the hand and wrist may be
distinguished. Rotch (20), emphasizing the carpals and the lower epi-
physes of the ulna and radius, developed a scale involving thirteen distinct
stages of development, but Long and Caldwell (14), Smith (27), and
Severson (25) found this scale unsatisfactory.
A second method consists of selecting a typical or median X-ray at
each chronologicalage and of using a series of these as standards for the
determination of anatomical or skeletal age. Woodrow (31) was the
first to employ such standards. Todd (28) has prepared similar standards
and these were applied by West to nearly all the repeated X-rays col-
lected by the Harvard Growth Study. The resulting skeletal ages were
studied by the writer in relation to age at first menstruation (26, Chap-
ter IX) and Figures 1 and 2 of the present monograph present a redraw-
ing of that data. It is these skeletal ages together with other measure-
ments collected by the Harvard Growth Study which were published in
extenso by Dearborn, Rothney and Shuttleworth (11). Still another set
of standards for determining skeletal age has been published recently by
Flory (12).
A third method of quantification involves measurement of the area
of the carpal bones by means of a planimeter. Baldwin (1, 2) in 1921
was the first to employ direct measurement and the first to use this
particular method. Carter (4) and Flory (12) have adopted essentially
the same technique. This procedure is especially well adapted to the
calculation of an anatomic index, i.e., the total area of the carpal bones
divided by the total area of the wrist. The resulting index indicates
directly what percentage of the wrist is ossified.
A less laborious method of measurement first employed by Prescott
(16) was to determine the greatest diameter of each carpal bone. He
summed these diameters and divided by the diameter of the wrist to ob-
tain his anatomic index. Variations in this method of linear measure-
ment have been used by Munk (15) and Sawtell (23, 24).
Hellman's study (13) in 1928 was the first to apply linear meas-
urements to other bones than the carpals and as such deserves separate
mention as a fifth approach to the problem of quantifying X-rays. The
extension of Prescott's and of Hellman's methods leads directly to the
basic data of the present study. Cattell (6) examined thirty-four specific
measurements of X-rays to determine the degree to which each could be
conveniently, objectively, and reliably measured. On the basis of this
evaluation she recommends twelve measurements (two metacarpal lengths,
four metacarpal widths, five carpal diameters, and the broadest width
of the radial epiphysis) for further study. She also proposed that these
measurements be combined to provide a total ossification sum. West (29,
30) extended these measurements to some two hundred girls in the Med-
ford population who had been followed with repeated X-rays over seven
to twelve years by the Harvard Growth Study. Still under the influence
of the original problem of practical correlates, West summed the twelve
measurements, expressed each as a percentage of mature development,
and correlated the resulting indices with intelligence obtaining the usual
negative results. However, he reported his ossification sums in extenso.
Among these records 104 cases were found for whom menarcheal ages
were available. These provided the original data upon which Figures 3
and 4 are based and led in turn to the present study.
2. Sources of Original Data
As just indicated the original data of this study stand in direct un-
broken line of descent from a paper published by Rotch in 1908. It
must be emphasized, however, that we are not at all interested in the
problems which have dominated this field of study over the past thirty
years. Specifically, we are not interested (1) in the carpal bones as
such, (2) in the construction or evaluation of a practical index or com-
posite measure of skeletal development, or (3) in the educational and
psychological correlates of ossification.
For the purpose of studying growth trends the ossification sums
computed by West are far superior to skeletal ages in that they provide
real units rather than arbitrary units of growth. They are very in-
adequate, nevertheless, since they are the unweighted sums of twelve
individual measurements. An initial difficulty arose immediately in that
systematic tables of the original measurements from which West computed
his ossification sums could not be found in the files of the Harvard Growth
Study. Professor Dearborn, accordingly, rhade available a large collection
of three by five cards on which all measurements of X-rays had original-
ly been recorded. These were sorted by code numbers and age in the
hope of finding the original measurements, but only 60.3 per cent of the
ossification sums reported by West could be identified. Since West's pro-
cedures involved duplicate measures of many X-rays and since his studies
of reliabilities occasionally involved as many as five sets of measurements,
selection was made from these additional sets of measurements of the one
set whose sum was reported in West's dissertation. By this method detailed
figures for each of the twelve measurements extending over periods of
from seven to twelve years and for each of 103 cases with menarcheal
ages were assembled. Our success in finding suitable data from the
additional measurements in cases where West's sums could not be identified
may be tested in terms of correlations. Considering only cases where the
ossification sums selected from the original cards do not agree with West's
sums and comparing the two figures at ages nine to eleven and twelve
to fourteen gives correlations based on 26 and 88 cases of .984 and .980.
Using all available cases at these ages and including, of course, the cases
where card sums and West sums agree exactly, the correlations are .999
and .994.
3. Methods of Measurement and Reliabilities

of Original Measurements
The technique of measurement is described in detail by West. Only

experienced observers were employed. The X-rays were placed in an il-
luminator and measurements were made under a magnifying glass with
calipers graduated to tenths of a millimeter. A single observer made all
the measurements for a given child, taking the X-rays in serial order,
comparing measurements at each age with earlier and later measurements,
and rechecking where this comparison did not indicate continuous growth.
West reports that approximately 60 per cent of the X-rays were inde-
pendently remeasured, but that the first set of observations were altered
only where discrepancies greater than .4 millimeters were verified by still
further measurements. Where two independent sets of measurements were
available these were averaged in the computation of his ossification sums.
Reliabilities of the ossification sums as reported by Cattell range from
.953 to .967. After the elimination of a few obvious errors of ten mil-
limeters the reliabilities range from .991 to .993. It is not clear, how-
ever, whether these are based on cases selected from the entire age range
or from a single age range. In any case these reliabilities should be
considerably higher than those of the twelve individual measurements.
Indeed, both Cattell and West seem to assume that the individual meas-
urements are unreliable since this is one of the reasons given for combin-
ing the measurements into a total ossification sum. Neither reported
conventional reliabilities for the individual measurements. Cattell, however,
reported median differences disregarding sign between pairs of measure-
ments by two observers on the same film and by the same observer on
two films of the same child taken at the same age. These are recorded
in columns one and two of Table 1. On the average two observers meas-
uring the same film disagree by .13 millimeters while measurements of
two films of the same child by. the same observer disagree on the average
by .22 millimeters. For comparison we report in columns three, four, and
five the results of a study of the last pair of measurements on each of
the available 103 cases prior to editing. The median differences of column
three average only .29 millimeters or somewhat larger than those reported
by Cattell. The differences in column three, however, involve different
films, different observers, and some slight differences due to differential
growth. The "reliabilities" of column four, ranging from .856 to .986,
are quite unexpectedly high. The probable errors of estimate in column
five average .34 millimeters and confirm the data of columns one to
three. The measurements are evidently quite reliable in spite of the
minuteness of the dimensions. Indeed, the absolute errors are almost
microscopic.
1
TABLE
RELIABILITY
OFTHEORIGINAL
MEASUREMNTS
Median Differences in Milli- Reliability

meters Disregarding Sign Coefficients
Two Obs. Same Obs. Last Corre- P.E. of
SameFilm Different versus lation estimate
Cattell Film next
Cattell to last
(1_) ,(2) (3) (4) (5)
lst Metacarpallength .11 .20 .26 .986 .29
5th Metacarpal length .09 .23 .29 .985 .37
1st Meta. Trans. Dis. .17 .20 .27 .930 .27
1st Meta. Trans. Prox. .10 .22 .20 .913 .22
5th Meta. Trans. Dis. .11 .19 .23 .931 .21
5th Meta. Trans. Prox. .15 .19 .22 .954 .19
Greater Multangular .12 .23 .37 .856 .39
Capitate .12 .24 .31 .925 .37
Triquetrum .12 .18 .23 .906 .36
Lunate .10 .16 .35 .879 .48
Navicular .18 .26 .49 .909 .56
Radial Epiphysis .17 .34 .27 .966 .33
Average .13 .22 .29 .926 .34
4. Corrections for Distortion
Although the original measurements were apparently made with great

care and with an evident high degree of reliability, they were, neverthe-
less, carried out blindly and in complete disregard of a distortion factor
which was introduced with a change in methods of taking the X-rays in
1929. Distinctions must, of course, be drawn between (a) constant
distortion factors, (b) minor distortion factors due to the fact that it is
impossible to place each hand in exactly the same position relative to the
source of the X-rays, and (c) major distortion factors due to a complete
shift in the position of the hand.
Minor distortion factors were clearly recognized and specifically studied
by Cattell. Data abstracted from her study, as reported in columns one
and two of Table 1, indicate that this is a more important source of
error than is the personal equation, care, and accuracy of a given ob-
server. In her selection of the best twelve measures, Cattell excluded
those of the original thirty-four which seemed to be most affected by
this factor.
Much more serious distortion is involved in a change in the technique
of taking the X-rays and in the area X-rayed. When the Harvard
Growth Study was initiated in 1922 the interest of research workers was
still centered on the carpal bones. Hence, the X-rays were directed to
this area and to the metacarpals, both hands being taken on the same
plate. It shortly became apparent that the carpal data were less valu-
able than the ossification of the rest of the hand. Further, the increas-
ing size of the two hands so crowded the X-ray plate as to cut off the
distal ends of the metacarpals. This situation was corrected in the fall
of 1929 when X-rays were taken of only the right hand. It results,
first, that' X-rays taken in 1928-29 and earlier frequently cut off the
distal ends of even the first and fifth metacarpals making it impossible
to obtain four of the twelve measurements. West interpolated for these
missing measuremehts and in such cases it was impossible to identify
his ossification sums among the original cards. A count of the 103 cases
shows that measurements of the distal end of the first or fifth or both
metacarpals is missing for at least one year in 71 cases. Of a total of
1151 sets of measurements, one or more of these four measurements are
missing in 107 or 9.3 per cent of the sets. It has been necessary to
make our own interpolations for these missing measurements.
It results, secondly, that growth changes between the school years
1928 and 1929 are influenced by a new distortion factor since the change
involves an alteration of the source of the X-ray relative to the position
of the right hand?. We estimate, relative to a constant position of the
right hand, that the source of the X-ray was moved three or four centi-
meters to the right and one or two centimeters forward distally toward
the tips of the fingers. When the measurements are arranged by yearq
of the Harvard Growth Study rather than by ages, the effect of this
shift on the measurements is clear at least in the case of the navicular,
84 per cent of the increments from 1928 to 1929 being negative. Neither
Cattell nor West make any reference to the possibilities of such distortion.
Since the subjects during 1929 ranged in age from twelve to sixteen
it is comparatively simple to measure the approximate magnitude of the
distortion by calculating two average increments at each age, one involv-
ing the distortion and one not. For the purpose of this analysis only
ages 13.0 to 14.5 have been studied. Table 2 sets forth the details of
these data for each of the twelve measurements listed in order of magni-
tude of the distortion relative to average growth from age eight to seven-
teen. At age 13.0 there are 35 true increments of the navicular not in-
volving the distortion which average 1.31 millimeters and 16 distorted
increments which average -1.16 millimeters. The difference of 2.47 mil-
limeters measures the amount of distortion at age 13.0. Similarly, the
distortion at ages 13.5, 14.0, and 14.5, amounts to 2.62, 2.42, and
1.28 millimeters. Weighting each of these by the smaller number of
cases involved in each comparison gives the correction factor in the next
to last column. The final column indicates the magnitude of the distor-
tion factor relative to the average growth between age eight and seven-
teen as determined prior to correction for distortion. Corrections have
been applied to the measurements of the first seven dimensions listed in
Table 2. In making these adjustments it was only necessary to add the
10
correction factor algebraically to the distorted increments at all ages where
they occur. That is, where the correction factor is positive, as in the
case of the navicular, it has been subtracted from the gross measure-
ments of 1928 and earlier years. Where the correction factor is negative
it has been added algebraically to the gross measurements of 1929 and
later years. This assumes that the smaller measurement involves less
distortion. That is, the shift in procedure of taking X-rays, which
might have been disastrous if all the cases had been of the same age,
TABLE2
OFDISTORTION
AMOUNT IN INCREMFNTS
ATAGES
13.0, 13.5, 14.0, and 14.5;
WEIGHTED ANDRELATIVE
CORRECTIONS; IMPORTANCE
MeanIncrementsEnding at Ages Correc- Relative

13.0 13.5 14.0 14 tion Impor-
N M N M N M N M (milli- tance
Navicular meters) (per cent)
True: 35 1.31 26 1.42 26 .59 19 .09
Distorted: 16 -1.16 16 -1.20 28 -1.83 24 -1.19
Distortion: 2.47 2.62 2.42 1.28 2.16 19.7
Greater Multangular
True: 35 1.30 25 .99 27 .36 20 .15
Distorted: 17 .12 16 -.17 28 -.18 24 .05
Distortion: 1.18 1.16 .54 .10 .67 8.6
Lunate
True: 34 1.02 25 1.06 27 .57 20 .47
Distorted: 17 .20 16 .26 27 .08 24 -.10
Distortion: .82 .80 .49 .57 .64 7.8
Capitate
True: 35 .96 24 .89 27 .43 20 .41
Distorted: 17 .31 16 -.28 26 .21 23 .10
Distortion: .65 1.17 .22 .31 .52 7.2
Fifth MetacarpalLength
True: 19 2.22 9 1.80 22 1.13 19 .67
Distorted: 14 2.56 9 2.50 18 1.83 17 2.02
Distortion: -.34 -.70 -.70 -1.35 -.80 5.6
Fifth Metacarpal, transverse proximal
True: 35 .46 27 .50 22 .21 20 .28
Distorted: 17 .68 16 .43 26 .57 24 .57
Distortion: -.22 .07 -.36 -.29 -.23 5.3
First Metacarpal length
True: 23 1.57 15 1.76 21 .77 20 .64
Distorted: 13 1.92 11 1.85 17 1.14 14 1.32
Distortion: -.35 -.09 -.37 -.68 -.39 3.2
First Metacarpal transverse distal
True: 24 .78 16 1.20 22 .33 20 .28
Distorted: 14 .67 18 .38 12 .57 15 .31
Distortion: .11 .63 -.05 -.03 .13 2.8
First Metacarpaltransverse proximal
True: 35 .65 24 .65 27 .51 20 .36
Distorted: 17 .64 15 .33 28 .34 24 .32
Distortion: .01 .32 .17 .04 .13 2.5
Fifth Metacarpal transverse distal
True: 13 .59 6 .63 19 .51 19 .32
Distorted: 10 .48 7 .54 16 .18 13 .42
Distortion: .11 .09 .33 -.10 .12 2.3
Triquetrum
True: 35 .40 26 .50 26 .59 20 .15
Distorted: 16 .39 16 .35 27 .53 24 .36
Distortion: .01 .15 .06 -.21 -.05 1.0
Radial Epiphysis
True: 36 1.55 27 1.54 27 .93 20 .80
Distorted: 17 1.51 16 .99 28 .85 24 1.09
Distortion: .04 .55 .08 -.29 .06 .5
11
has been capitalized to yield data which, theoretically at least, involve
less distortion than had the same procedure been used throughout.
A further complication must be noted in the cases of the two meta-
carpal lengths and transverse distal widths. As noted above one or more
of these four measurements are frequently missing for 1928 at the crucial
point of the shift in procedure. It results that the number of cases at
each age with measured increments, whether true or distorted, is con-
siderably reduced. Fortunately the corrections applied to three of these
dimensions are relatively small, but the accuracy of the data is blurred
by the necessity for interpolations over the same range of ages.
Some alleviation of all of the foregoing difficulties is that they are
distributed over the age range from twelve to sixteen. It results that
any systematic errors which remain in the data or which have been in-
troduced into the data are reduced at least by half even where they are
operating in greatest force. Further, if we were only interested in
demonstrating that early and late maturing girls have different growth
patterns, the problem of distortion would be relatively unimportant and
might be ignored. That is, distortion operating equally on early and
late maturing groups could not create such differences as those of Chap-
ters III and IV. Correction for distortion is important only where con-
trasts between measurements, as in Chapter V, are the center of interest.
The method of computing the generalized growth patterns employed in
Chapter V dilutes still further the influence of systematic error. How-
ever, it must not be imagined that the corrections are negligible even
though they are, for the most part, fractions of millimeters. Figure 5,
in terms of generalized patterns of annual increments, presents illustra-
tions of the influence of the relatively largest and smallest distortions for
which corrections have been applied. Correction for a distortion factor
of 2.16 millimeters in the case of the navicular makes a difference at
the most of 1.13 millimeters between the true and false trends shown
at the bottom of Figure 5. In the case of the first metacarpal length
correction for a distortion factor of -.39 millimeters makes a difference
at the most of only .11 millimeters between true and false trends.
5. Procedures
Methods of analysis employed in this study are identical with those

employed in the writer's earlier study of physical growth (26, pages 192-
197, 208-210, 214-219, 229, and 236). Since the writer suggested in
the earlier study that cases with doubtful menarcheal ages might be ex-
cluded from further studies, it should be noted that this has not been
done. Adjustments have not been made for the occasional short interval
between the first and second X-ray because this is not a systematic fac-
tor in these data. Only 61 or .4 per cent of the total of 13,467 origi-
nal figures were discarded as erratic. With only 103 cases available
the population has been divided into three groups: those
menstruating be-
fore age 12-6, between age 12-6 and 13-5, and after age 13-5. Each
of these was further subdivided into those measured within three
months
of birthdays and within three months of the half-yearly anniversaries of
birthdays. Average annual increments for each of these six groups were
computed. A single figure for average size was calculated for each group
at an age having the largest number of observations and the average in-
crements were added to and subtracted from this base figure to obtain
growth trends in average size. These data are reported in Table 3.
12
SLG
I METACARPAL LENGTH
K1
I ,
0\A
CORRECTED ------
UNCORRECTED I II I I
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /0.0 //.0 /2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7.0 /8.0 /9.
YEARs ENDING AT /ND/CATED AVERAGE AGES
Fig. 5. Generalized patterns of average annual increments in the navicular and

first metacarpal length before and after correction for distortion.
The symbols "IML" etc., at the top of the table are explained at the
outset of Chapter IV. Ages are mid-points of intervals of six months.
No data are available at age 5.5 as in the earlier study since the cases
are all from the city of Medford. The number of cases reported in column
two applies to all measurements. Except where the full number of cases
is available, it should be noted that these data are not conventional
averages. Thus, the 14 girls menstruating prior to age 12-6 and meas-
13
TABLE3
TRENDSIN AVERAGE
GROWTH SIZE OF TWELVE
SKELETAL OF THREEGROUPS
MILLIMETERS,
DIMENSIONS, OF GIRLS
AT DIFFERENT
MENSTRUATING MEASURED
AGESANDOF SUB-POPUIATIONS AT BIRTHDATYS
APPROXIMATELY
ANDTHEHALF-YEARLY OF BIRTHDATS
ANNIVERSARIES
Girls tenstruating Prior to Age 12-6; Measured Approxia tely at Birthdays.

Ae N IML V SL IMTD IMTP VMTD VMTP Gm C T L N In
b.0 4 28.54 33.49 .8-.83 7. 6.71 7.97 5.69 14.96 9.14 8.06 4.73 18.12
7.0 9 30.82 36-32 953 8.42 7.03) 8.54 7-51 17.19 10.02 9.5 7.00 19.75
1.0 13 32.46 38.27 9.9 9.14 7.54 9.17 9.55 18.72 11.27 11.09 9.36 21.64
9.0 15 34.52 0.09 10.55 10.07 1.31 9.85 11.24 20.00 12.35 12.66 11.63 2 .60
10.0 15 36.57 42.50 11.17 11.09 9.43 10.73 13.00 21.57 11.23 14.48 14.17 26.09
11.0 15 39-1345.143 2 12-39 10.59 11.59 14.76 23.04 14.31 16.30 17.09 29.37
12.0 15 41.52 48.17 13.41 13.30 11.37 12.11 15.85 2.49 14.85 17.85 19.51 31.18
13.0 15 42.24 49.64 13. 1.91 11.16 12.50 16.74 24.96 15.22 18.38 20.26 31.94
14.0 15 42.77 50.31 14.12 14.16 12.17 12.61 16.95 25.22 15.52 18.72 20.19 32.30
15.0 15 43.06 jo.54 14.31 14.31 12.41 12.58 16.92 25.23 15.69 18.99 20.68 32.72
16.0 15 43.10 50.70 14.31 14.19 12.51 12.67 17.08 25.62 15.57 19.20 20.77 32.71
17.0 14 43.30 50.90
go 14.47 14.24 12.65 12.77 17.07 25.52 15.74 19.50 20.51 32.79
18.0 7 43.38 'io.s 14.57 14.33 12.60 12.50 17.14 25.48 15.56 19.40 20.47 32.95
19.0 1 43.38 51.25 14.77 14.53 12.80 12.40 16.74 26.18 15.56 19.0 21.77 33-15
20.0 1 43.85 51-35 14.57 14.13 12.90 12.40 16.94 26.28 15.46 19.40 21.27 33.15
Girls lenstrusting Prior to Age 12-6; Measured Approximately at Half-yerarly Anniversaries of Birthdays.
6.5 7 29.56 34.27 9.03 7.96 7.01 8.45 6.09 16.10 9.38 7.91 5.31 19.19
7.5 9 31-92 36.83 9.45 8.76 7.76 9.02 3.13 17.59 10.75 10.15 8.30 20.70
8.5 11 33.91 38.83 10.03 9.72 8.26 9.70 10.02 19.22 11.87 12.09 10.88 22.68
9.5 11 35-57 40.92 10.63 10.414 1.95 10.46 11.45 20.34 12.87 13.31 12.99 24.45
10.5 11 37.66 43.71 11.19 11.59 9.90 11.35 1.02 21.74 13.78 15.02 15.59 27.12
11.5 11 1.57 4.50 12.28 12.85 11.13 12.22 14.88 23.58 14.97 17.01 18.58 30.56
12.9 11 42.51 49.54 13.23 13.57 12.00 12.80 16.40 25.33 15.31 18.42 20.68 32.53
11 50.80 13.90 13.85 12.55 12.92 16.60 25.29 15.65 19.07
N135 11 43.31 21.05 33.20
14.5 43.65 51.14 14.02 14.16 12.75 13.23 16.96 25.72 15.87 19.23 21.54 33.75
15.5 11 43.78 51.20 14.11 14.25 12.87 13.35 17.25 25.82 15.95 19.15 21.31 33.83
16.5 11 43.90 51.21 14.23 14.37 13.00 13.37 17.26 25.87 16.10 19.33 21.31 33.95
17.5 o10 44.04 51.33 14.21 14.40 13.01 13. 1 17.32 25.90 16.37 19.23 21.73 34.13
11.5 3 44.44 51.3 14.45 14.60 13.01 13.48 17.32 26.13 16.47 19.36 21.40 33.93
19.5 1 44.64 51.33 14.35 14.40 13.01 13.28 17.72 26.53 16.57 1956 21.30 33-93
lirls genatr0atin0 Between Ages 12-6 and 13-5; Measured Approxirately at Birth ys.
A 'e IML VUL IMTD IMTP 810TD VTP 10 C T L N RE
6.0 : 20.1 8.b68 7-23 6.41 8.15 3.18 15.21 .4 5.73 3.0 17.9
3303
7.0 19 30.67 36-13 9-54 8.27 6.;- 8.75 7.35 17.07 10.00 8. .63 1.Sb1
3.0 26 32-56 3 03 993 9.10 7.:5 9.27 8.99 18.23 11.20 10.66 8.93 21.51
9.0 27 34.28 140.2 1.46 9.85 2.30 9.95 10.64 19.62 12.18 11.60 11.07 23.18
10.0 27 36.20 42.42 11.01 10.80 9.22 10.76 12.37 21.01 13.22 13.08 13.28 25.23
11.0 27 3-.34 4.86 11.75 11.89 10.32 11.62 13.92 22.38 14.30 14.98 16.2 27.87
12.0 27 41.21 47.72 12.61 13.02 11.M1 12.40 15.63 23.82 15.24 16.95 19.65 30.87
14.0 .27 43.03 30.29 13.44 13b.6 12.00 12.68 16.78 24.99 15.60 17.97 20.79 32.;0
14.0 27 43.90 51.62 13.91 14.10 12.40 13.14 17.32 25.51 16.08 1.
l:0 21.05 33.40
15.0 27 44.314 52.13 14.16 14.25 12.69 13.28 17.65 25.90 16.20 18.77 21.45 33.95
16.0 26 44.47 52.31 14. 1 14.29 12.78 13.27 17.78 26.10 16.25 18.76 21.19 33.92
17.0 26 4.72 52.30 14.0 14.35 12.91 13.35 17.82 26.12 16.32 10.59 21.19 33.97
18.0 13 4.72 51.95 14.11 14.36 12.87 13.35 17.62 26.05 16.31 19.23 21.26 34.18
19.0 . 2 44.77 2.15 14.46 14.41 12.97 13.35 17.22 25-95 16.46 12.63 21.01 34.53
Girls Menestruating Between Ageos 12-c and 13-5; leasured Approxix.tely at Half-yearly Anniversaries of
Birt hdays.
6.irt
52ys9.0 3560 831 7-99 6.89 7334 7.17 16.02 9.62 8.23 6.28 19.59
21
7-5 31.62 37.22 9.45 .51 7.31 6.02 9.25 18.18 10.66 o10.11 9.04 21.29
8.-5 22 33.52 39.31 10o.0 9.52 7.-9 9.34 o10.& 19.30 11.6 11.66 11.19 22.63
9 25 2 35.12 40.08 10.47 10.N2 8.57 10.06 11.93 20.27 12.54 12.93 12.91 24.32
10.5 22 36.91 42.5 11.26 11.12 9.62 10.85 13.49 21.62 13.41 14.53 14.76 26.32
11 5 22 39.05 45.43 12.01 12.22 10.63 11.49 14.97 22.92 14.50 16.21 17.81 2z.94
12.5 22 41.4 48.02 12.92 13.17 11.35 12.05 16.3;8 24.32 15.44 17.92 20.18 31.64
13-5 22 43.39 50.46 13.77 13.71 11.23 12.50 17.23 24.92 15.76 15.93 21.64 33.01
14.5 22 43.91 51.27 14.02 13.99 12.21 12.72 17.67 25.42 15.99 19.43 21.82 33.92
15.5 22 44.18 51.55 14.25 14.30 12.44 12.34 17.06 25.87 16.05 19.46 22.07 34.05
16.; 22 44.35 51.64 14.38 14.37 12.59 12.90 17.92 26.014 16.11 19.58 21.714 34.07
17.f 22 44.51 51.85 14.147 14.5 12.5 12.97 17.95 26.20 16.29 19.60 21.74 34.15
16.5 44.75 51.9s 14.52 14.40 12.77 12.96 17.77 25-92 16.30 19.76 21.54 314.26
Girls iVenstrating
Age
6.0
7.0
N IML
2
- --
29.20
-- _ - - -
VML
35.71
o 3-5; Measured Afproxioately at Birtiodays.
After Age
I1TD I0TP
9.50
MT1 iT
VYTD
3.41 6.88
14 C
d.23
-
7.55
--
16.44
- -. -
9.57
TI L
a.70 6.68
_b
1
-.
19.86
8.0 13 3.1-76 37.94 .96 9.13 7-37 8.88 91g 18-38 10.14 10.143 9.34 21-73
9.0 14 33.43 39.94 10.37 9.69 8.01 9.61 10.57 19.33 11.57 11.91 11.12 23-39
10.0 15 75.2i 41.64 11.01 10.64 3.75 10:.47 11.96 20.67 12.86 13.37 13. 7 25.1i
11.0 12 37.1- 43-77 11.59 11.63 9-71 11.13 13-7 22.10 13.72 15.07 15. 3 27.43
12.0 15 39j10) 46.09 12.01 12.5 10.N0 11.81 15.04 14.34 16.39 17.65 29:74
2331:
1?
15 41.39 48z93 13.22 13.30 11.3 12.34 16.i47 24. 0 14.02 17.65 19.54 31- 7
14.0 15 4.92 5100 13.30 13.80 11.59 1279 1i5960 L513 15-79 18.72 20.97 33029
15.0 15 -83 5245 1431 14.39 12.33 13.o02 1717 2.85 16.12 1.1 21.016 367
16. 15 44.27 2.29 14.64 14.39 12-53 13.09 17.7 20.le 16.24 19.304 21.35 34.)
17.0 15 44.23 o3u6 14.70 14.41 12.76 13.11 17-79 26032 13.42 21.23 34.32
12.0 1?.1
44. 53- 13 14.76 14.1414 12.74 1331 17.7 20.55 10.30 19.44 21.27 34146
15.9 5 .90 53 31 14.86 14.42 13.00 13.55 1715b 25-. 5 16.42 15.14 220.97 34.4o
2..0 2 4. 32 53.4i 14.81 14.52 13.05 13.10 17.66 20.15 10-52 19.59 21.07 34.45
Giris Roenstr.sting After Age 13-5; Meaware AApproximately at 2alf-yearly Anniversaries of Birthdays.
j 9 30.38 3.954 9.12 8.314 6.72 8.70 6.29 17.02 10.08 7.b6 6.46 20.29
I5 11 32.29 37.0' 9.72 9.34 7.66 9.13 8.26 18.67 11.23 13.15 9-13 21.78
9-5 13 33-d2 39.- 10.31 5.25 1.27 9.82 10.48 19.92 12.22 11.47 11.18 23.36
10.5 13 35.72 41.29 10.62 12.58 .99 10.314 11.68 21.00 13.0O 12.94 12.51 25.02
11-5 13 37.45 43.06 11.47 11.49 9.51 10.92 13.22 22.30 13. 14.24 13.49 26.94
12. 13 39.72 43.72 12.09 12.59 10.55 11.66 14.96 23.72 14.b 1.03 18.44 29.72
13 2 13 4i.69 48.03 13.05 13.31 11.79 12.24 16.30 25.17 15.61 17.28 20.21 31.72
14.j 13 43.60 50.34 13.60 13.83 12.23 12.76 16.29 25.75 15.96 16.01 21.50 33.03
15-5 13 1414.43 51.42 14.14 14.37 12.70 12.31 16.37 25.96 16.13 1Z.13 21.13 33.8-
16 9 13 44.66 51.69 14.13 14.30 12.81 13.02 17.22 26.w2 16.47 1.148 21.1 34.14
17.5 12 44.76 51-72 14.33 14.-52 13.08 13.10 17.25 26.55 16.21 18.71 20.97 34.21
ia.4 12 44.86 1.2 14.48 14.44 13.11 13.11 17.26 26.114 16.06 1i.79 21.22 34.14
1S?5 3 414.30 31.22 14.62 14.54 13.24 13.11 17.40 27.02 16.72 1.49 21.95 34.11
14
r-H N 0
N N
N4% r s
o 0 ,- to --"- g•. •--
O-%,0 I,--g ,- -
4o - Coo
SN4
WN
N
oono
N o-o m-cr-4CN
oJNN
XN
NNWN Nrc\ W %,
F rbo oNm
r,-Mrt-%pM\t-%cl
r t
It
M 0 ot O -Mn t oO 00- 1- 00
ON NU t I -
CT%1toN 0 O't0YO
- .J-iJo r-4 f a\r-CO \N,.Cn I,- ,N _ C)C ,, " .o0 --N ,---o -to o a
re-N0
N--:I-tot 0 .oN-N;-: t to o- 0t
.4.
-. - - r -
r- t1-4 t.CO
rrrtotfOto r-4r-4t')oto
- r-4tor-l
tO r-ttor -. Ztot.o
N- ow r-- r-- tdr )o
H - totto r r -
tototo r-4r rl to bo Ko-1t
'
a NCID-N o-N 0 -N-N r-N V-NLcDN-NC\ V- N V-
L- 9N V-N V-N 4 rN-
NT N-N
r4l-4C)0N-N- wCOto 1000

\ H-4 N
0? H: NU 1" 7ID\Q N-N-to to
tor4r4 r - - - -4r4r4r4 N - -
r-4r-4 r-4 r-4r-4 r-N r-.t t-4 A r4r
SN-ato tow too 0 w -4to

bVo C) HIwcw
r'. 4 IC til ww w 00w wH HH0NwN
V-ww
4 V r- - CV N- N r-N CV r- N- - N- rN- N- N- N-N- N- N- N- Nr-N-N r-- C N- C
N-N-
n
,"z r--07-,&
r ON
C)o,.* NCAC?
Ch -e
A, ,-:,; r..t;
*
tl ;
) t;--,
c0Nr-
0c - r-4-; 0c
mNoCo N
jre-) 4;_--.i- -01 0 N
roto
.-H 0; -
\
- I"-I IC r- WIb- -I.
.-1 ".0 r--r 0WC 0
to 01\ 0 rJ0
C.l 4r 4 r I r" I
--I-- -t .- I"'D
r.-
I--4
1 q("D H -N V V 7 r-100 --0"o

N'.0-4
'0 0•4) r-r.0 -
(Lo)!N- to,',..-) Al
t4'-- 0*• - 0 0t,
E QO C\: -to to NNr-r4

NON-OrN-NC ) CY 0- r4 Nt
N-Hk-0 N 'N
-n Nt
0 H r-Ir -40 .-
r-. -40 Or--4 -r- r 4 4IO 4-"IO-L)IC
4 O r-4r- Lr- )O-4 '4 r- -4O
0) - r-1NtO - N-l O",,'r-,N
L r--
Pe
0Lb o10100'0N r"•40
0r- No-to O ! t"o0-"rto
to-- 0 r-0 N- N0•Or--M
In4
;4 r-
w
H,. r-r.)-r-
M'orf"
r 10N-Vo10to
Cs 1'.- j rlc\ cr\
r-- C VNN N-?-\JC~j
t.-\ 1'.- W l
10o
HN\J
O Ct N,* 04)
? N-4 HN-cU
H
rC tj N- N- to
F Cto 1000 a H
-N MbM-4 -
10.0N ? Ato to? to 0'L r.:- tbt10 C
r-4 N -4' rO to" 0 r04 ,--4 4-H -4 -4•-4 -4H -4 -A

SN-t- r-,-r. 0
r-4&
r4 r-4 r-4r- c#-4 r-4 rN
t 0r-4-4 N- C.4
O .J
WN C0 0 0' N-
N0 • 0D : N0to N
N- b- N C)O 110,10-N0 .0N
N-O N 0 lrOt N-t1O 0 "C N 0- IN0
bO r N- 0tro M 00- -4H ON 1 %D N101 r--N-0 D- - N- N- N-N to -to to N- N--
N? -4N 0 -- r-4 - 'D

0MVCM oIn rID--
NN et
ft' W
1- N
Or--OH N P1 crN
b4 D rN- r-4M n1000
r-40H N 1 4 LoN-ll H CNCU N r-101 N 0 : 0M O O
r-. V r-
r-40 r- -r-4 - r4 - c- c- - 10- 0101010
r r- -4 4r4r-
101010
4) O 01 n 0
H C) 14
-1C) N- N-'%UN)to H to4\ o% ON- LC 0X%0- n -r C
r-t 4 Hnr-4 H H
VOCU v-%I-V 0N-V uO
10100N a ,n bo
V o O r-i kD10 o IN
* * * * * *
No 10 C V10 14* *4*f
N N N
N NNrNNS NI Nr; N N - -
N TtIt t N N N N 1n LNNI- N
n N In nL N N
H H H H H H H H HHt H H H H H H H HcH
15
ured at birthdays do not average 43.30 millimeters in first metacarpal
length (IML) at age 17.0. Rather, these 14 cases grew on the average
.20 millimeters between age 16.0 and 17.0 and this .20 millimeters has
been added to the directly computed average of 43.10 millimeters at-
tained by all 15 cases at age 16.0. From this method of computation
it follows that the increments are often more reliable than one decimal
place would indicate. For this reason and for purposes of convenient
computation all the data are reported to two decimals. Trends are re-
ported even though based on a single case, but in such instances discre-
tion has been exercised in including or omitting the data in the charts.
Data for cases measured within three months of birthdays and for
cases measured within three months of the half-yearly anniversaries were
combined separately for each of the three menarcheal groups as explained
in the earlier study. This gives observation points at intervals of six
months although the original X-rays were taken at intervals of a year.
It is these combined data rather than the data of Table 3 which are
charted in Chapters III and IV.
Figures 31 to 34 arrange the increment curves of the three groups
of girls so that corresponding points on their patterns of growth are as
nearly as possible in the same vertical line. Weighted averages of the
three increment curves as thus arranged yield generalized patterns. The
weighted averages of the corresponding ages have also been computed to
provide a precise time scale for such generalized patterns. These data
in terms of average size are reported in Table 4. The series of ages in
column one apply to the averages in columns two and three, the ages in
column four apply to the averages in columns five, six, and seven, etc.
For the benefit of special students, Table 5 reports such standard
deviations as have been calculated incidental to correlations reported in
Tables 1, 6, and 7.
TABLE5
DEVIATIONS
STANDARD IN MILLIMETERS
OF GROSSFIGURESANDOF INCREMNTS
Gross Figures AnnualIncrements

Age SD Age SD SD of Years Ending at
Last Indicated Ages
Figure
Age SD Age SD
1st Meta. Length 12.0 2.53 11.5 3.11 2.61 14.0 .76 14.5 .87
5th Meta. Length 12.0 3.13 12.5 3.51 3.18 15.0 .86 14.5 1.08
Ist Meta. Trans. Dis. 12.0 1.00 12.5 1.26 1.10 14.0 .50 14.5 .43
1st Meta. Trans. Prox. 11.0 .92 11.5 1.13 .79 15.0 .45 15.5 .46
5th Meta. Trans. Dis. 11.5 .89 11.5 1.34 .86 15.0 .30 15.5 .30
5th Meta. Trans. Prox. 12.0 .83 11.5 1.13 .96 14.0 .39 13.5 .40
Greater Multangular 11.0 1.43 11.5 1.68 1.13 13.0 .84 13.5 .89
Capitate 12.0 1.67 12.5 1.52 1.46 14.0 .70 13.5 .94
Triquetrun 11.0 1.47 10.5 1.08 1.27 14.0 .75 13.5 .56
Lunate 12.0 1.59 11.5 1.88 1.49 14.0 .70 14.5 .67
Navicular 11.0 2.73 10.5 2.76 1.99 14.O 1.37 13.5 1.25
Radial Fpiohysis 11.0 2.41 11.5 1.87 14.0 .92 13.5 1.10
2.70
16
CHAPTER III
GROWTH TRENDS IN AVERAGE SIZE OF EARLY, MIDDLE, AND LATE

MATURING GROUPS OF GIRLS IN RESPECT TO
TWELVE BONY DIMENSIONS OF THE HAND AND WRIST
Figure 6 presents a graphic illustration of the twelve measurements

with which this study is concerned. These will be considered in the order
in which they are numbered. The symbols in parentheses identify the
data of Tables 3 and 4.
1. First metacarpal length, including its epiphysis. (IML).
2. Fifth metacarpal length, including its epiphysis. (VML).
3. First metacarpal transverse distal diameter, broadest width
at distal end. (IMTD).
4. First metacarpal transverse proximal diameter, broadest
width of epiphysis or of proximal end of shaft after
fusion. (IMTP).
5. Fifth metacarpal transverse distal diameter, broadest
width of epiphysis or of distal end of shaft after fusion.
(VMTD).
6. Fifth metacarpal transverse proximal diameter, broadest
width at proximal end. (VMTP).
7. Greater multangular, greatest diameter. (GM).
8. Capitate, greatest diameter. (C).
9. Triquetrum, greatest diameter. (T).
10. Lunate, greatest diameter, (L).
11. Navicular, greatest diameter. (N).
12. Radial epiphysis, greatest diameter of epiphyses prior to
fusion and greatest width of shaft after fusion. (RE).
The available population of 103 cases has been divided into three
groups: 26 cases menstruating before age 12-6, 49 cases menstruating
between age 12-6 and 13-5, and 28 cases menstruating after age 13-5.
These will be referred to as early, middle, and late maturing cases
(Groups E, M, and L) in the sense that the menarche occurred at an
early or late age. In the analysis of the data, growth trends were
computed separately for two sub-groups within each of these major groups,
i.e., for cases measured within three months of birthdays and within
three months of the half-yearly anniversaries of birthdays. Combining
the data from these two sub-groups yields observation points at intervals
of six months although the original X-rays were taken at annual inter-
vals.
Figures 7 to 18 present the resulting growth trends in average size.
All of the scales at the left are in millimeters and all have been so drawn
that average growth from age eight (7.50 to 8.49) to seventeen is rep-
resented by the same vertical distance. That is, a tracing on trans-
parent paper of any chart can be superimposed for comparison on any
other chart. Further, these charts may also be superimposed on com-
parable charts in the writer's study of sexual maturation and physical
growth. In superimposing charts from the two studies, however, allow-
ance must be made for the fact that the earlier study presents growth
curves for eight groups whereas only three groups are involved in this
study. The horizontal scale gives the mid-points of age intervals of six
17
Fig. 6. X-ray illustrating the twelve measurements.
months, that is, age 7.0 is the mid-point of the interval 6.75 to 7.24.
Only the most obvious features of Figures 7 to 18 need to be dis-
cussed. Every one of the twelve skeletal dimensions shows a clear and
regular differentiation in the average size of the three groups at approxi-
mately ages ten, eleven, and twelve just as did standing height, sternal
height, sitting height, leg length, iliac diameter, chest breadth, chest
depth and body weight as reported in the earlier study. This phenomenon
is also true of head width and sternal-vertex height. It is also true of
head length, but the difference falls short of statistical reliability. The
only exception to this rule is the number of erupted permanent teeth.
From age six to thirteen the early maturing girls are bigger on each of
twenty-three specific physical and skeletal measurements than are the
18
late maturing girls. In terms of Stanford-Binet IQ's administered from
age 10.0 to 13.99 the early maturing girls are also brighter, but the
differences are not reliable.
At the point of greatest contrast in Figures 7 to 18 Group E is
from 5.7 per cent to 15.6 per cent bigger than Group L. The detailed
percentages for each dimension together with comparable figures contrast-
ing girls menstruating before age 12-6 and after age 13-5 for all avail-
able physical measurements and for Stanford-Binet IQ's are reported in
Table 6. The largest difference appears to be that for body weight.
On this measurement early maturing girls exceed late maturing by 33.6
per cent at age 12.0. The much greater contrast shown by body weight
is due to the fact that it is a three-dimensional or volume measurement,
the actual contrast translated into terms of linear units being only about
10 per cent. That is, in order to increase the volume contained in a
cube by 33.6 per cent it is necessary to increase the linear dimensions
by only 10.14 per cent. Hence, the greatest contrasts are really shown
by the lunate and navicular, the early maturing girls having larger bones
by 13.8 per cent and 15.6 per cent respectively on the average. In
terms of areas of carpal bones these figures are equivalent to differences
about 29.5 per cent and 33.6 per cent while in terms of volume these
figures are equivalent to differences of about 47.3 per cent and 54.7
per cent. The smallest differences are shown by the two head dimensions.
A remarkable feature of these data is the consistency with which
ages
11.5 and 12.0 prove to be the points at which the greatest contrast ap-
pears. Save for estimated skeletal age where the units are arbitrary
and the navicular where the greatest contrast appears at age 11.0, it is
a uniform finding that Group E grows more rapidly to
age 11.5 or 12.0,
and that Group L grows more rapidly after ages 11.5 or 12.0. The
magnitude of these contrasts is, of course, a function of the fact that
girls menstruating prior to age 12-6 are being compared with girls mens-
truating after age 13-5. When, as in the earlier study of physical
growth, groups menstruating before age 11-6 and after 14-5 are com-
pared, the contrasts are considerably larger but the ages at the point of
greatest difference remain 11.5 or 12.0 save that the greatest difference
in iliac diameter and weight appear at age 12.5.
While the foregoing analysis provides a direct and comparable method
of contrasting early and late maturing groups on all of a series of meas-
urements, it sheds very little light on the closeness of the association be-
tween measures of size and menarcheal age when individuals are con-
sidered. For the purpose of elucidating this point, columns three to eight
of Table 6 present coefficients of correlation at
ages selected to show the
closest relationship. In the study of physical growth these correlations
were reported separately for cases measured within three months of
birth-
days and within three months of the half-yearly anniversaries of birth-
days, and in order to maintain comparability the same procedure has
been followed in the analysis of the skeletal data. All of these corre-
lations are negative and all, excepting those with head
dimensions and
Stanford-Binet IQs, are clearly reliable. That is, the earlier the
the bigger the individual at menarche
approximately ages eleven and twelve.
A second general tendency is for these differences to disappear or
be reversed during the later teens. With the exception of the lunate
(Figure 16) the initially smaller late maturing group is in the end big-
ger than the early maturing group. The differences at maturity are
probably not statistically significant and, in any case, too much reliance
can not be placed on the consistency of the findings since the same
19
6
TABLE
TOMENARCHEAL
SIZE ACCORDING
IN AVERAGE
DIFFERENTIATION AGE(a) IN TERMS
BETWEEN
OFCONTRASTS GROUPS
EXTREME OF CORRELATIONS
AND(b) IN TERMS
Measurements Contrasts Correlations with Menarcheal Age

Age at %by Cases Measured Cases Measured
Point of which at Birthdays at Half-yearly
Greatest GroupE Anniversaries
Contrast Exceeds
GroupL Age N r Age N r
1. 1st Meta. Length 11.5 7.0 12.0 57 -.334 11.5 46 -.310

2. 5th Meta. Length 12.0 6.1 12.0 57 -.209 12.5 46 -.415
Trs. Dis. 12.0 9.0 12.0 57 -.395 12.5 46 -.36L
3. ist Meta.
Meta. Trs. Prox. 11.5 8.9 11.0 57 -.366 11.5 46 -.448
4. ist Meta. Trs. Dis.
5. 5th 11.5 10.2 12.0 57 -.395 11.5 46 -.349
6. 5th Meta. Trs. Prox. 11.5 7.2 12.0 57 -.206 11.5 46 -.440
7. Greater Multangular 11.0 9.7 11.0 57 -.295 11. 5 46 -.370
8. Capitate 12.0 5.7 12.0 57 -.295 11.5 46 -.373
9. Triquetrum 11.5 5.7 11.0 57 -.261 10.5 46 -.268
10. Lunate 11.5 13.8 12.0 57 -.294 11.5 46 -.542
11. Navicular 11.0 15.6 11.0 57 -.195 10.5 46 -.374
12. Radial Epiphysis 11.5 9.6 11.0 57 -.322 11.5 46 -.509
13. Ossification Sums 11.5 8.9 11.0 57 -.308 11.5 46 -.458
14. Skeletal Age 13.0 10.3 13.0 123 -.713 12.5 123 -.722
15. Standing Height 12.0 5.0 12.0 123 -.500 11.5 124 -.522
16. Sitting Height 12.0 7.0 12.0 123 -.498 11.5 124 -.539
17. Leg Length 11.5 8.3 ll• 122 -.290 111 115 -.556
18. Sternal Height 11.5 5.4
19. Sternal-vertex Ht. 12.0 4.0 12.0 123 -.392 12.5 124 -.404
20, Iliac Diameter 12.0 10.6 13.0 123 -.495 12.5 124 -.608
21. Chest Breadth 11.5 9.7 12.0 117 -.495 12.5 123 -.585
22. Chest Depth 12.0 9.2 12.0 117 -.424 12.5 122 -.387
23. Body Weight 12.0 33.6 13.0 123 -.496 12.5 124 -.613
All Cases
Ages N r
24. Head Length 12.0 1.6 11.0-12.99 238 -.100
24. HeadBreadth 12.0 2.1 11.0-12.99 238 -.144
25. Stanford Binet IQ's 10.0-13.99 3.2 10.0-13.99 201 -.015
Notes. Standard deviations of menarcheal ages are as follows: items one to thir-
teen .997 and .923 years for 57 and 46 cases; items fourteen to twenty-three 1.1i8 and
.972 years for 123 and 125 cases measured at birthdays and half-yearly anniversaries;
items twenty-four and twenty-five 1.011 years; item twenty-six .929 years. Correlations
involving items 17, 24, and 25 based on a population of 238 cases after eliminating the
following from the original population of 248 cases; six cases with less than seven sets
of annual measurements (#147, #383,*1384, 41535, #2949, and #2965); two cases with no
measurementsfor two consecutive years in middle of record (0754 and #2914); one case
of abnormally retarded development (#1272); one case with doubtful menarcheal age (#598).
These cases were selected in connection with another problem involving prediction of
the menarchewhich also involves a different age grouping; hence, the ages for leg
length are 11+ and 11i. The HarvardGrowthStudy did not obtain head measurementsand
Stanford Binets each year; hence, measurementsnearest to age 12.0 for the indicated
age ranges were employed. Correlations involving these three measurementsare not sta-
tistically reliable. Of the three differences between early and late maturing groups
only that for head width is statistically reliable..
individuals are involved in each comparison. What is important, how-

ever, is not that the late maturing group becomes bigger in the end but
rather that the initial large inferiority of the late maturing group disap-
pears. Or, the important point is that early and late maturing groups
experience their period of accelerated growth at different ages. Much
data to the same effect have been reported for physical measurements.
A third generalization is that each skeletal dimension has its own
characteristic pattern. Thus, the six metacarpal measurements, the radial
epiphysis, and the navicular show decided accelerating phases attaining
20
their greatest intensity between age eleven and thirteen, whereas, in the
case of the carpal bones, except the navicular, there is a gradual and
persistent slowing of growth without a marked accelerating phase. How-
ever, the characteristic patterns of each dimension will be considered more
thoroughly in Chapter V.
21
1' i 1I i ' 1 ....! T ! ! • . ,
41
0,
33/// /
k 35/
//
. 7/
/ 49
Y, '
Ix
rr I /
I/ I
• • - 4
g9 I
__ 'l /i --• -
r/r
..... . i
/3i '/ ... ..

AFTER13-5
MENARCHE -35
6.0 7.0 8 9.0 / //0 2.0 0/ 4.0 / 6.0 70 8.0
. f 2-
Qi, /
~ // . . . . . . ..BFO
/ / EACE126T
k( BEFORE 12-6
MENARCHE
9 /- M~ENARCHE BFERE 12- --
3MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5
6.o t.o 8a• 9.o /o1 /. o /3 ). 3.o / 4.o / 5.e /6.o l/z o/.o / 9.o
AGES
AGES
Fig. 7 and 8. Average first (above) and fifth (below) metacarpal length of three
groups of girls.
22
SI I I ..1. 1 . .•.
!
14.5 I
//
/ /
WI
J13
-
7 1 I 7
/ /
2MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

8--- MENARCHE 2-6 TO 13-5
-- MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
6.0 7.0 8.o 9.0 /00 /10 /4.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /70 8.0 /9.0
A GES
23
12/
W /
// //
/ /.
MENARCHEBEFORE 12-6
S/ //
I) i
SMENARCHE AFTER 13-5
AGEs
A Grs
Fig. 11 and 12. Average fifth metacarpal transverse distal (above) and proximal
(below) diameter of three groups of girls.
24
1,000
1/7
/- /
3.
Q:/
""2
? / .
Z24.
9//
8-
"c I
I/"
S--
/-7 A
/C$
1 /
15 /
BAFTRER12-6
MENARCHE
7 2. 4.0
I 5.0 6.0 ZO 0 /9
6.01
AGES
Fig. 13 and 14. Average greater multangular (above) and capitate (below) diameter
of three groups of girls.
25
/6
/
iI / /
14
//
II ..
IJI"!s A 1I
17
/,2
,- -H/, . , BF.8
S .CH FORE 12-6

1 / MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5
;1 grou3sof girls. 1 MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /10.0 10 12.0 !5.0 41.0 50 16.0 f 70 18.0 /9.0
AGES
26
20
Si
/4 / / I I I I1 I 35
S'• -- - -34
S. /
-/J/ 32
/0o
--3
4I /
MENARCHE BEFORE 2-6
SMENARCHE AFTER 13-5
60 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 /.O / 2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /70 /8.0 /19.0
AGES
Fig. 17 and 18. Average navicular (above) and radial epiphysis (below) diameter of
27
27
CHAPTER IV
PATTERNS OF GROWTH REVEALED BY ANNUAL INCREMENTS

OF EARLY, MIDDLE AND LATE MATURING GROUPS OF GIRLS
Figures 19 to 30 present the growth trends of early, middle, and

late maturing groups of girls in terms of average annual increments.
These charts are based on exactly the same data as Figures 7 to 18
save that average annual increments rather than averages of gross size
are charted. For convenient representation all the vertical scales have
been magnified by four. Since growth from age eight to seventeen was
represented throughout Figures 7 to 18 by the same vertical distance,
simple magnification of all such scales by four insures the comparability
of all increment charts. Thus, the distance from the zero to the "SLG"
grid line is the same throughout and always represents one-ninth of
growth from age eight to seventeen. If growth in average size were a
straight line over this age range, the annual increments would fall on
this "SLG" or Straight-Line-Growth grid. These charts may also be
superimposed on similar charts in the writer's study of physical growth,
but it must be kept in mind that a very wide range of magnification
is involved. That is, a chart of the increments of standing height
plotted to the same scale as Figure 24 would require a vertical space
one hundred times as great.
Instead of discussing each of Figures 19 to 30 in turn, it will be
more convenient to direct attention to three characteristic features and
under each to note variations from measurement to measurement. Our
interest in this chapter is in the similarities and differences shown by
the growth patterns of each of the three groups, postponing to the next
chapter a discussion of the similarities and differences shown by the
growth patterns of each of the twelve measurements.
The most characteristic feature of the data is the great contrasts
between the growth patterns of the three groups of girls when chrono-
logical age is emphasized as in Figures 19 to 30. Thus, in Figure 19
the increments of Group E are consistently the largest and those of Group
L consistently the smallest for the years ending at ages 9.0, 9.5, 10.0,
10.5, and 11.0. A similar contrast holds for each of the measurements
save the triquetrum in Figure 27. That is, save for the triquetrum,
there is a negative correlation between increments and menarcheal age
during the accelerating phase of growth. Again, in Figure 19 the in-
crements of Group E are consistently the smallest and those of Group L
are consistently the largest for the years ending at ages 13.5, 14.0,
14.5, 15.0, 15.5 and 16.0. A similar contrast holds without exception
for all measurements. That is, during the decelerating phase of growth
there is a uniform positive correlation between increments and menarcheal
age. Table 7 presents these correlations together with comparable data
for physical dimensions. The correlations involving the two metacarpal
lengths, which range from .567 to .702, are unexpectedly high. An-
other contrast appears in the ages at which accelerated growth occurs.
In Figure 19 Group E begins its acceleration at age 10.0, attaining the
peak of accelerated growth at 11.5, while the same phase occurs a year
later in Group M and two years later in Group L. Similar differences
are clearly apparent in Figures 20, 22, 23, 29, and 30. Comparable
contrasts in the timing of the decelerating phases are apparent in each
28
of the twelve measurements. The regular serial order in which these
growth phases occur means that they are also timed in relation to the
menarche.
TABLE7
AGEWITHGROWTH
OF MENARCHEAL
CORRELATIONS INCREMENTS
FORTHEYEARS
ATSELECTED
ENDING AGES
Cases Measured Cases Measured at

at Birthdays Half-yearly
Anniversaries
First Metacarpal Length 14.0 57 .567 14.5 46 .702

Fifth Metacarpal Length 15.0 57 .640 14.5 46 .685
First Meta. Trans. Distal 14.0 57 .287 14.5 46 .479
First Meta. Trans. Prox. 15.0 57 .331 15.5 46 .369
Fifth Meta. Trans. Distal 15.0 57 .380 15.5 46 .341
Fifth Meta. Trans. Prox. 14.0 57 .213 13.5 46 .320
Greater Multangular 13.0 57 .227 13.5 46 .396
Capitate 14.0 57 .067 13.5 46 .493
Triquetrum 14.0 57 .253 13.5 46 .235
Lunate 14.0 57 .399 14.5 46 .299
Navicular 14.0 57 .397 13.5 46 .403
Radial Epiphysis 14.0 57 .473 13.5 46 .401
Standing Height 14.0 123 .679 14.5 124 .700
Sitting Height 15.0 121 .466 14.5 124 .528
Iliac Diameter 14.0 123 .396 13.5 124 .352
Chest Breadth 14.0 123 .312 14.5 122 .309
Chest Depth 15.0 121 .348 14.5 124 .342
Weight 14.0 123 .336 14.5 124 . 425
Skeletal Age 16.0 110 .553 15.5 116 .453
An equally striking and characteristic feature is the similarity of

the growth patterns of the three groups of girls when chronological age
is ignored. If in Figure 19 the curve for Group E is moved one year
to the right while that of Group L is moved one year to the left, this
similarity will be more apparent. Figures 31, 32, and 34 superimpose
the curves of each measurement in this manner so that corresponding
points on the patterns of Groups E and L are arranged as nearly as pos-
sible in the same vertical line with those of Group M. The age scales
in these charts are those for Group M.
In addition to clarifying the similarity of the growth patterns of
the three groups of girls, Figures 31 to 34 reveal in addition a con-
sistent difference in the intensity of these patterns. Thus, the incre-
ments of Group E in first metacarpal length at the top of Figure 31
tend to be larger than those of Group M and the increments of Group
M in turn tend to be larger than those of Group L when comparisons
are made at corresponding points on the pattern of growth. A similar
regular order in the intensity of the growth patterns of the three groups
is readily apparent in the fifth metacarpal length, the first metacarpal
transverse proximal, fifth metacarpal transverse distal, capitate, lunate,
and radial epiphysis. Although this phenomenon is not so regular in the
other five measurements, comparing only Groups E and L demonstrates
that this tendency is involved in all of the twelve measurements. A
similar phenomenon is also true of physical measurements.
29
-2 SLG
S L G
i,
- \
2.0 0 -
-J
-J
-SL \
2SLG I I I .
3.0 0
k 0
-4J
S1.00
-- ----MENARCHEBE.FORE2-6
------ MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5 \
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 10.0 / /. 2.0 13.0 14.0 /5.0 16.0 /70 18.0 19.0
30
/.2 0 I I I I I I I I
/.00
S SL
O /4
I
t K! \ \
>I•O/,,SL-
: ,,/ ,.'
S/
t.oo -/ '
SMENARCHE BEFORE
i2-6
k -----MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5
.20 .MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
K •.
I I I
\\
6. 7.0 9.0 / 0.0BEFORE 12-.0 /30
8.0MENARCH /4.0 / /6.0 /8.0 /.0
Fig. 21 and 22. Increments in first metacarpal transverse distal (above) and proxi-
mal (below) diameter of three groups of girls.
31
/.2 0 1- 1 l 1 1 1 1 1I I I i I i i I
2 SLG
(1)/.00
L.80
'.4
, .40 : .
",\ \
S
.20
i-
2 SLG
S
S.80-
)K
Q.
K .60
SLG-
40
.20- MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

SMENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5
- MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
0 -
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 I0.0 Io /2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 17.0 18.0 19.0
Y)EARS ENDING AT INDICATED AGES
Fig. 23 and 24. Increments in fitth metacarpal transverse distal (above) and proxi-
mal (below) diameter of three groups of girls.
32
'2.0 0
-2 SLG '
"J1.64-O
-
1.4 0
'/.20-
too." S
2 SLG
.80-
Q: .6O
1.40
2.00 3 I
I I . I \
F--w.
80
J -2 SLG
/.0 -
>1
SLG \
0
Q.O6- \
Yt19 \N/N ?; ~/RTDA
.20 \
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /0.0 1.0

/12.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7.0 /8.0/19.0
YEARS ENDING AT NDICATED AGES
Fig. 25 and 26. Increments in greater multangular (above) and capitate (below)
diameter of three groups of girls.
33
1.2 0-
-2 SLG
/.00
4:.80-0 "
IZ.6 O-
- L
SLG .
.4 o - \
Z .20-
Li\
S2S L G \ .
2.0
_3 - \\ \
\1

.40- ------MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13-5
MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /0.0 .0 1/2.0 13.0 14.0 15.0 16.0 / 70 /8.0 /9.0
YEARS ENDING AT IND/CATED AGES
Fig. 27 and 28. Increments in trlquetrum (above) and lunate (below) diameter of
three groups of girls.
34
-T1~
3.00-
2 SL G _
2.60 -2 ,
:2.2 O i
/.80- \
/\
1.40-0
S-LG-
t 0
-\
8 - N
/.00
-00\
3.00
S.60- MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6
, AraIt
_,I/ I \I t
1 -- SLG
.20-
6.0 70 8.0 9.0 / o0.0 / 2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /.o /o7.0/6.0 /8.0/o
Fig. 29 and 30. Increments in navicular (above) and radial epiphyisis (below)
diameter of three groups of girls.
35
SLG
"IMETACARPAL LENGTH
-SLG
" LENGTH
'METACARPAL
I META. TRANS DISTAL
13-5
AFTER
MENARCHE
Fig. 31. Average annual increments in first metacarpal length, fifth metacarpal
length, and first metacarpal transverse distal diameter of three groups of girls ar-
ranged so that corresponding points on the pattern of growth are in the same vertical
1 ne.
36
"SLG
I META. TRANS. PROX.
SLG
V META. TRANS. DISTAL
\ \
\/ .
S-SLG
V META. TRANS. PROX. -

SLG

MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /0.0 /I.0 /2.0 /3.0 /14.0 /5.0 /6.0 17.0 /8.0 /9.
Fig. 32. Average annual increments in first metacarpal transverse proximal diameter,
fifth metacarpal transverse distal diameter, and fifth metacarpal transverse proximal
diameter of three groups of girls arranged so that corresponding points on the pattern
of growth are in the same vertical line.
37
SLG-'\ \ GREATER
MULTANGULAR
-SLC
14J
T~~
",,IUETRU
----- -MENARCHE 12-6 TO 13- ...
YEARS
KEARs ENDING A~T
ENDING Ar INDICATED
IND/CAT~ED AGES
AGES
Fig. 33. Average annual increments in greater multangular diameter, capitate

diameter, and triquetrum diameter of three groups of girls arranged so that correspond-
ing points on the pattern of growth are in the same vertical line.
38
SL'
SG
LU NATE
.\ ,\1
NAVICULAR
MENARCHE AFTER 13-5
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /0.0 /1.0 /2.0 /3.0 /14.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7.0 /8.0 /9.
Flg. 34. Average annuai Increments in lunate diameter, navicular diameter, and
radial epiphysls diameter in three groups of girls arranged so that corresponding points
on the pattern of growth are in the same vertical line.
39
CHAPTER V
CONTRASTINGGROWTHPATTERNS OF
THE TWELVE MEASUREMENTS
In Chapters III and IV interest was directed toward the similarities

and differences in the growth patterns of the early, middle, and late
maturing groups of girls. Here, interest is directed toward the similar-
ities and differences in the growth patterns of the twelve skeletal dimen-
sions. It should already be clear from Figures 31 to 34 that each
dimension has its own distinctive pattern. For the purpose of clarifying
these contrasting patterns the three curves for each measurement have
been combined into a single generalized pattern by computing weighted
averages at corresponding points of the pattern as plotted in Figures 31
to 34. Weighted average ages have also been computed in order that
the resulting twelve curves may be drawn in precise relative position to
each other on a time scale. Figures 35 and 36 present the resulting
generalized patterns of annual growth increments for each of the twelve
dimensions. These are arranged in pairs beginning at the top of Figure
35 with the two dimensions which show the most intense growth just
prior to the final or decelerating phase, and ending -t the bottom of
Figure 36 with the two dimensions which show the least intense growth
just prior to the final or decelerating phase. This automatically groups
the dimensions roughly according to the type of growth pattern from
age nine to seventeen.
The navicular and the radial epiphysis at the top of Figure 35 show
the most intense growth. For the years ending on the average at ages
11.51 and 12.01 the increments of the navicular average 2.14 and 2.11
times as great as would be expected if growth from age 8.0 to 17.0
were on a straight line. Similarly, the point of greatest acceleration in
the radial epiphysis also crosses the "2SLG" grid line, the increment for
the year ending on the average at age 11.88 being 2.07 times as great
as would be expected from straight line growth. Since the area under
the curve from age 9.0 to 17.0 is almost exactly the same for each,
dimension, certain other features of these two curves follow automatically
from the fact that growth is so very intense as to cross the "2SLG"
grid. In such cases the pattern must show a very steep accelerating
phase, a very abrupt final decelerating phase, and sharp inflection point
or transition between these two phases. Further, since the acceleration
of the navicular is stronger than that of the radial epiphysis, it must
show a more abrupt decelerating phase than that of radial epiphysis.
Thus, in spite of the fact that the area under these two curves from
9.0 to 17.0 is almost exactly the same and both dimensions show very
intense growth, it is apparent that the two dimensions have different
patterns from age 9.0 to 17.0. Prior to age nine, of course, the pat-
terns are radically different, that of the navicular resembling sitting
height and that of the radial epiphysis resembling body weight. Con-
sidering the other ten dimensions, which are grouped in order of the
intensity of growth just prior to the final decelerating phase, the fol-
lowing progressive shifts in the pattern should be noted: the accelerating
phase from age nine or ten to age eleven or twelve becomes progressively
more feeble, the final decelerating phase becomes progressively less abrupt,
and the inflection point or transition between these phases becomes more
4O
I IN I I I I , I I ,
NAVICULAR
RADIAL EPIPHYSIS -----
SLG
I META.TRANS. DIST. - , \
I/META.TRANS. PROX.----/
L-9
QC SLG
V METATRANS. DIST.
- 7META.TRANS. PROX.-----
SLG
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /0.0 /.0 /2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7.0 /8.0 /9.0
YEARS /NDICASrED
ENDING AT AVERAGE AGES
Fig. 35* Generalized patterns ot annual Increments in six skeletal dimensions

which show intense grcf&th prior to the firnal decelerating phase.
41
I I
SLG
I METACARPAL LENGTH
V METACARPAL L E N G T H- ---
S LG
LUNATE \
CAPITATE . \
k
SLG
GREATER MULTANGULAR-
TRI QUETRUM - \-
-- --
\ -,
YEARS ENDING AT INDICATED AVERAGE AGES
Fig. 36. Generalized tterns of annual increments in six skeletal dimensions

which show less intense growth prior to the final decelerating phase.
42
SLG \ ---
S""I I \\
"
0 ".
NAVICULAR --------
---L
I: META. TRANS.DIST.
"YMETA. LENGTH
GREATER MULTANGULAR .
Y META TRANS. PROX.
YMETA. TRANS. DIST. 0-0-0
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 / 0.0 11.0 /2.0 /3.0 /4.0 15.0 6.0 /7.0 /8.0 /
Fig. 37. Generalized patterns of annual Increments in six skeletal dimensions !1-
lustrating extreme contrasts.
and more rounded. Of the twelve dimensions only the two metacarpal
lengths, the lunate and capitate, and the greater multangular and tri-
quetrum can be regarded as having similar patterns. That is, we have
at least nine recognizably different patterns. Their great diversity is
illustrated in Figure 37. Further, all of these nine patterns are recogniz-
ably different from the patterns of standing height, sitting height, leg
length, iliac diameter, chest breadth, chest depth, and body weight.
Excepting standing height, the patterns of the physical measurements
are assembled in Figure 38.
Classification of these sixteen distinctive patterns by type is necess-
arily arbitrary. Depending on the fineness of the classification, from
two to six types may be distinguished. For our presenf purpose three
types will be sufficient. In Type I there is an initial decelerating phase
followed by an accelerating phase and a final decelerating phase. This
type is most striking in sitting height and the navicular in which cases
43
-2SLG
...
.... .. ....
?
-SLG
OXo-o 2
ILIAC DIAMETER
CHEST BREADTH .
"1 DEPTH
-.- . .... . ...
SLEG LENGTH
SITTING HEIGHT
WEIGHT 0-0-o
70 80 9.0 /00 // /2.0 / 3.0 /40 /5.0 /6.0 /70 /8.0

YEARS ENDING ATr INDICATED AVERAGE AGES
Fig. 38. Generalized patterns of annual increments in sitting height, leg length,
iliacdiameter,chest breadth, chestdepth, and body weight..
there are very decided initial decelerating phases followed by very steep
accelerating phases with sharp transition points. This pattern is less
striking in the case of standing height and the two metacarpal lengths
and still less striking in the case of leg length, the lunate, and the
capitate. Type II begins with an initial phase of rather constant growth,
either slightly accelerating or decelerating, which is followed by a marked-
ly accelerated phase and the typical abruptly decelerating phase. Under
this type may be grouped iliac diameter, chest breadth, chest depth, body
weight, the four metacarpal transverse diameters and the radial epiphysis.
In Type III the entire pattern is one of decelerating growth interrupted
between ages ten and twelve by a period of constant growth or at best
a very slight acceleration. The patterns of the greater multangular and
triquetrum at the bottom of Figure 36 are representative.
Doubtless there are good and sufficient causal factors determining
the dynamics of each of the different growth patterns. In his earlier
study of physical growth the writer thought that some tentative explana-
tions could be offered. The contrast between patterns of sitting height
and leg length was attributed to the differences in the bone components
of the two dimensions. The similarity of the patterns of iliac diameter,
chest breadth and chest depth suggested a pattern for width dimensions.
44
On the basis of these clues, the expectation was that the two meta-
carpal lengths would behave as did leg length, but they actually show
a greater resemblance to the pattern of sitting height. The four meta-
carpal transverse diameters and the radial epiphysis show the same type
of pattern as did .iliac diameter, chest breadth and chest depth tending
to confirm the existence of a width pattern, but these eight dimensions
have very little in common except that they are diameters. Considered
as diameters the carpal bones might be expected to show similar width
patterns, but they obviously do not. Further, there is not even a carpal
pattern although, if measurements of the navicular had not been avail-
able, the evidence would be quite clearly in favor of a consistent and
distinctive carpal pattern. In the light of these differences no explana-
tion of the contrasting patterns of the dimensions can be offered. That
is, we have a theory to explain contrasts between early and late ma-
turing groups of girls, but no theory to explain contrasts between
dimensions.
Considering all sixteen patterns from another point of view, it is
clear that the skeletal dimensions show a much greater variety of con-
trasting patterns than do the physical dimensions. Each of the physical
dimensions has, of course, its own distinctive pattern, but in the earlier
study the writer was impressed by their general resemblance and by the
fact that the contrasts between the patterns of early and late maturing
groups of girls were actually greater than the contrasts between dimen-
sions. Here, the opposite situation holds true, the contrasts between
dimensions being very much greater than the contrasts between early and
late maturing groups. This point is so clear that graphical demonstra-
tion is not necessary. However, the method of chart construction em-
ployed to this point tends to conceal the true diversity of the skeletal
patterns since the area under the increment curves from age 9.0 to 17.0
is almost exactly the same from dimension to dimension. Figure 39,
which presents the generalized patterns of the twelve skeletal dimensions
plotted to the same arithmetic scale, provides a much more vivid picture
of the extreme diversity of these patterns. A comparable chart including
chest depth would require a vertical distance three times as great while
to include standing height would require a vertical distance twenty-five
times as great.
An even more vivid picture of the extreme diversity of these gener-
alized patterns is given by Figures 40 to 43 in which percentage rates
of growth per year are plotted. Note in Figure 40 that the growth of
the navicular from age six to seven is 61.3 per cent of its size at age
six while the corresponding figure for sitting height is only 4.2 per cent.
Nevertheless, as shown in Chapter IV and in the earlier study, both of
these dimensions show contrasting growth patterns for early and late
maturing groups of girls. Magnifying the vertical scale of Figure 40 by
four, replotting the curves for the triquetrum and sitting height, and in-
cluding the capitate, the fifth metacarpal transverse distal, and body
weight gives Figure 41. Using this same scale, Figure 42 presents four
additional measurements while Figure 43 assembles the four metacarpal
widths, leg length, iliac diameter, and sitting height. The three types
of patterns can be readily recognized.
The striking feature of the data, however, is not the extreme diversity
of patterns shown by different dimensions, but rather that, in spite of
this diversity, each dimension shows similar contrasts between early and
late maturing groups. Further, there is a remarkable consistency in the
ages at which inflection points occur in the generalized patterns. These
45
are summarized in Table 8. Columns one and two report the ages at
which the initial decelerating phase reaches its lowest level of growth
in terms of both increments and relative rates just prior to the beginning
of the accelerating phase, while columns three and four report the ages
at which the generalized curves reach their peak just prior to the final
decelerating phase. All of these ages are subject to errors of .5 years
because observation points at more frequent intervals are not available,
many are determined by very small margins of hundredths of a centi-
meter or a millimeter, and in the case of the starred ages it is not clear
whether the inflection point is due to chance fluctuations. On the average
the first inflection point is at age 9.62 or 3.35 years before the advent
of the menarche while the second inflection point comes on the average
at age 12.04 as determined from increment curves and at age 11.81 as
determined from relative growth rates or .93 and 1.16 years before the
advent of the menarche.
8
TABLE
AGES
ATFIRSTANDSECOND
INFLECTION
POINTS
AS SHOWN
BYGENERALIZED
PATTERNS
OFINCREMENTS
ANDRELATIVE
GROWTH
RATES
Measurements First Inflection Point Second Inflection Point

MarkingTransition MarkingTransition
FromDecelerating to FromAccelerating to
Accelerating Growth Decelerating Growth.
Incre- Rates of Incre- Rates of
ments Growth ments Growth
1st Meta. Length 9.02 10.02 12.02 12.02
5th Meta. Length 9.52 10.02 12.02 11.52
1st Meta. Trans. Dis. 9.38* 9.38 12.38 12.38
1st Meta. Trans. Prox. 8.65* 8.65 11. 65 11.65
5th Meta. Trans. Dis. 8.77* 11.77 10.77
5th Meta. Trans. Prox. ----11.15 10.65
Greater Multangular 9.51 ---- 12.01
Capitate 9.65 9.65* 12.15 10.65
Triquetrum 10.78* ----11.78* -----
Lunate 9.51 ---- 12.01 -----
Navicular 10.01 10.01 11.51 11.51
Radial Epiphysis 8.38* 11.88 11.88
Standing Height 9.67 9.67 12.17 12.17
Sitting Height 9.55 10.05 12.55 12.55
Leg Length 10.15 10.15 11.65 11. 615
Iliac Diameter 9.93 12.43 12.43
Chest Breadth 12.40 12.40
Chest Depth 12.64 12.64
Weight 10.12 12.62 12.12
Average 9.62 9.62 12.04 11.81
46
3.0
I-NAVICULAR
2 2-RADIAL EPIPHYSIS
3-Y META. LENGTH
4-I META. LENGTH
5-LU NATE
6-GREATER MULTANGULAR
7-CAPITATE
S8-I META. T RANS. PROX.
2.5- 9- META. TRANS. DIST.
S1\ 0-T R I QUET R UM

I I-Y META. TRANS. PROX.
\i \ 12-1 META.TRANS. DIST.
iA
8/
./ .
_ 1/23. \ \ .
e. o 7-o 8-o 9-o / /-0 12.0 13.0 1/4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7.0 /8.0 /19.
YEARs
YEARS ENDING
ENDING AT
AT INDICATED
INDICATED AVERA
AVERAGE GE AGES
AGES
Fig. 39. Generalized patterns of annual increments in twelve skeletal dimensions
plotted to the same arithmetic scale.
47
6 011...
55 ? I.-
I| GREATER MULTANGULAR
------- NAVICULAR
----- L U NATE
SI ............ T RI QUET RUM
I.--- -o SITTING HEIGHT
45-
40 ..
35 -
30.
'I:
Q20
/5 \
/0-\.t \
15
. \ \
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 / 0.0 \/ 2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 / 70 /8.0 /9.
YEARS ENDING AT INDI/CATED AVERAGE AGES
Fig. 40. Percentage rates of growth per year shown by generalized patterns of
navicular diameter, greater multangular diameter, lunate diameter, triquetrum diameter,
and sitting height.
48
/6 /
/S
1/
2I-
"/0
Q 7
(4 6
Ul
2 -
-_ BODY WEIGHT
Y META.TRANS. DIST.
7TRIQUETRUM
/ -- ----- CAPITATE
0- 0 0 SITTING HEIGHT
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 / 0.0 //.0 2.0 /3.0 /4.0 /5.0 /6.0 /7.0 18.0 /9.
Fig. 41. Percentage rates of growth per year shown by generalized patterns of body
weight, fifth metacarpal transverse distal diameter, triquetrum diameter, capitate
diameter, and sitting height.
49
/0
t,7-
6
51
4-
2
---RADIAL EPIPHYSIS
S - I META. TRANS. PROX.
I META. LENGTH
/ ---..---. META. LENGTH -
* SITTING HEIG HT
,
- J -1 1 1- 1 1 - - .
o0 11 -I
6.0 70 8.0 9.0 / 0.0 / 2.0
/23.0 /4.0 /5.0 / 6.0 / 7.0 / 8.0 /9.
Fig. 42. Percentage rates Otfgrowth per year shown by generalized patterns of first
metacarpal transverse proximal diameter, radial epiphysis diameter, first metacarpal
length, and sitting height.
50
/2 -' T T F
IO
PROX.
TRANS.
S/TA
2- 1 META. TRANS. DIST.

..-- \ META. TRANS. PROX.
--- LIAC DIAMETER
WTLEGLENGTH
/ .-. ------ SITTING HEIGHT _ "
6.0 7.0 8.0 9.0 /0.0 /IO /2.0 /3.0 14.0 /5.0 /6.0 17.0 18.0 /9.
Fig. 43. Percentage rates of growth per year shown by four metacarpal transverse
diameters, leg length, and sitting height.
51
CHAPTER VI
SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATIONS
In an earlier study of a group of 248 girls, the writer demonstrated

very striking differences in the growth patterns of early and late matur-
ing groups of girls in standing height, sitting height, leg length, iliac
diameter, chest breadth, chest depth, body weight, and skeletal age as
estimated from X-rays of the hand and wrist. The present study ex-
tends the research of the earlier one to twelve linear measurements taken
from X-rays which were repeated annually over periods of seven to twelve
years on a group of 103 girls. This population was divided into three
groups: those menstruating prior to age 12-6, between 12-6 and 13-5,
and after 13-5. The skeletal data for each of these groups have been
analyzed and charted in the same way as the physical data so that the
findings throughout the two studies are as directly comparable as pos-
sible. In both studies we have been interested (1) in investigating the
contrasting growth patterns of early and late maturing groups of girls
and (2) in analyzing the contrasting growth patterns of the available
dimensions. The similarity of problems, data, methods of analysis, and
results suggests the formulation of conclusions for the two studies as a
unit. For this purpose we will quote from and amplify the seven major
conclusions of the earlier study, presenting and numbering them in the
same order.
First, each of nineteen physical and skeletal dimensions has its own
distinctive and characteristic pattern of growth. All the generalized pat-
terns are, of course, clearly and radically different when plotted to the
same arithmetic scale as in Figure 39. When plotted in terms of per-
centage rates of growth per year, as in Figures 40 to 43, only three
pairs of patterns are recognizably similar. These are the two meta-
carpal lengths, the triquetrum and capitate, and the radial epiphysis and
first metacarpal transverse proximal diameter. When plotted to scales
such as Figures 35 to 38, which force a high degree of resemblance, only
three pairs of patterns are similar. These are the two metacarpal lengths,
the lunate and capitate, and the triquetrum and greater multangular.
Only the two metacarpal lengths resemble each other both in terms of
increments and rates of growth. However, the extreme diversity of these
patterns is not the major point to be emphasized, but rather that, in
spite of this diversity, there are still remarkable uniformities.
Second, while each dimension has its characteristic pattern there are
nevertheless certain general resemblances or types. In the earlier study
two types of patterns were described. One consists of decelerating, ac-
celerating, and decelerating phases and includes eight dimensions: stand-
ing height, sitting height, leg length, navicular, lunate, capitate, and
the two metacarpal lengths. The other consists of only accelerating and
decelerating phases and includes nine dimensions: iliac diameter, chest
breadth, chest depth, body weight, radial epiphysis and the four meta-
carpal diameters. Of these, iliac diameter, body weight, radial epiphy-
sis, and the two first metacarpal transverse diameters show an initial
decelerating phase of relative growth rates. A new type revealed by
this study shows a decelerating pattern of increments throughout the
available age range interrupted between ages ten and twelve by a period
of constant growth or at best a very slight acceleration. The greater
52
multangular and triquetrum at the bottom of Figure 36 belong to this
type. In terms of relative growth rates the lunate and capitate show
decelerating trends throughout.
Third, these characteristic patterns which are most clearly revealed
by the generalized curves are also apparent in the patterns of the several
groups of girls who menstruated at different ages. That is, except for
significant minor differences, the patterns of the several menarcheal
groups are very much alike. Charts in which chronological age is ignored
and coresponding points on the several increment curves are arranged in
the same vertical line, as in Figures 31 to 34, are illustrative.
Fourth, while the patterns generated by the increments of the several
menarcheal groups are very much alike, they occur at very different
chronological ages. That is, the pattern of the group menstruating prior
to age 12-6 is similar to that of the group menstruating after age 13-5,
but the two patterns are separated on the average in the case of the
skeletal dimensions by an interval of one and a half years of chronological
age (Figures 19 to 30). Hence, at approximately age ten to twelve
when the early menstruating group is at the peak of its accelerating
growth phase the late menstruating group is just beginning its accelerat-
ing phase. At this point, except for the triquetrum, there is a negative
correlation between annual growth increments and menarcheal age. This
situation is completely reversed a little later when the early maturing
group has almost ceased growing and the late maturing is still growing
rapidly. At this point there is a positive correlation between annual
growth increments averaging .43 for six phlysical dimensions and .39 for
skeletal dimensions (See Table 7).
Fifth, since the accelerations and decelerations of the early and late
menarcheal groups occur at different chronological ages, it follows that
growth trends in average size of the several menarcheal groups are clear-
ly distinguished. The early maturing group is consistently bigger at ages
six to nine, the contrast becomes progressively greater to age 11.5 or
12.0, thereafter this contrast tends to disappear or be reversed (Figures
7 to 18). The degree to which the early maturing group is bigger at
ages eleven and twelve varies greatly from measurement to measurement,
but the direction of the difference holds for all available measurements
although it is not reliable for erupted teeth, head length, and IQ (Table
6).
Sixth, since the decelerating, accelerating, and decelerating phases of
the several menarcheal groups occur in serial order, it also follows that
the inflection points marking the transition between the phases are timed
in relation to the advent of the menarche (Figures 19 to 30). On the
average the first inflection point marking the transition from initial de-
celerating to accelerating growth occurs 3.35 years before the advent of
the menarche while the second inflection point in terms of increments and
relative growth rates occurs .93 and 1.16 years before the advent of
the menarche.
Seventh, superimposed on the similarity of the patterns of the several
menarcheal groups as noted in the third conclusion, there is a consistent
difference in the intensity of growth, that of the early maturing group
being more intense than that of the late maturing group.
The major contribution of the present study is the finding that all
of the above conclusions hold not only for large external dimensions but
also for a great variety of minute aspects of skeletal growth. The nature
of the findings reinforce the endocrine interpretation of the data. The
probable sequence of events in each individual is pituitary stimulation,
53
followed by the initiation of the processes of sexual maturation and of
accelerated physical growth, followed in turn by endocrine mechanisms
dependent on ripening ovaries which bring the period of accelerated growth
to a close and somewhat later initiate the cycle of menstruation. This
complicated serial pattern of events begins as early as age eight or as
late as age twelve in different individuals and culminates in the advent
of the menarche as early as age ten -or as late as age sixteen. Since
the early maturing groups are stimulated when they are comparatively
small and far from their mature size it follows that their period of ac-
celerated growth is more intense than that of late maturing groups.
54
LITERATURE CITED
(1) Baldwin, Bird T. The physical growth of children from birth to

maturity. Univ. Iowa Stud., Stud. Child Welfare. Vol. I,
No. 1, 1921. Pp. 411.
(2) Baldwin, Bird T., Busby, L. M., and Garside, H. V. Anatomic
growth of children. Univ. Iowa Stud., Stud. Child Welfare,
Vol. IV, No. 1, 1928. Pp. 88.
(3) Binet, A., and Simon, T. The development of intelligence in
children. (Trans. by E. S. Kite) Publ. Tr. School, Vineland,
N. J., No. 11. Baltimore: Williams and Wilkins, 1916. Pp.
336.
(4) Carter, Thomas M. Techniqu6 and devices used in radiographic
study of the wrist bones of children, Educ. Psychol., 1926,
17, 237-247.
(5) Cattell, James McK., and Farrand, L. Physical and mental
measurements of students of Columbia University. Psychol.
Rev., 1896, 3, 618-648.
(6) Cattell, Psyche. Preliminary report on the measurement of ossi-
fication of the hand and wrist. Human Biology, 1934, 6,
454-71.
(7) Crampton, C. Ward. The influence of physiological age upon
scholarship. Psychol. Clinic, 1907, 1, 115-20.
(8) Crampton, C. Ward. Physiological age: A fundamental principle,
Am. Phys. Educ. Rev., 1908, 1, 141-54, 214-27, 268-83,
345-58.
(9) Crampton, C. Ward. Anatomical or physiological age versus chrono-
logical age. Pedagogical Sem., 1908, 15, 230-37.
(10) Crampton, C. Ward. The differences between anatomic, physio-
logical, psychological, and chronological ages in cases of derail-
ment, Am. J. Obstet., 1910, 42, 147-53.
(11) Dearborn, Walter F., Rothney, J. W. M., and Shuttleworth,
Frank K. Data on the growth of public school children (from
the materials of the Harvard Growth Study). Monog. Soc.
Res. Child Develop., Vol. III, No. 1. Washington, D. C.:
National Research Council, 1938. Pp. 136.
(12) Flory, Charles D. Osseous development in the hand as an index
of skeletal development. Monog. Soc. Res. Child Develop., Vol.
I, No. 3. Washington, D. C.: National Research Council,
1936. Pp. 141.
(13) Hellman, Milo. Ossification of epiphyseal cartilages in the hand,
Am. J. Phys. Anthrop., 1928, 11, 223-57.
(14) Long, Eli, and Caldwell,. E. W. Some investigations concerning
the relation between carpal ossification and physical and mental
development. Am. J. Dis. Child. 1911, 1, 113-38.
(15) Munk, V. Anton. Die Kerngrossen der Handwurzelknochen und
des distalen Unterarmabschnittes bei normalwuchsigen Kinder
von der Geburt bis zur Pubertat, Arch. f. Kinderh., 1927,
80, 185-94.
(16) Prescott, Daniel A. The determination of anatomical age in school
children and its relation to mental development. Harvard Univ.
Press, 1923. Pp. 59.
(17) Rotch, Thomas Morgan. Chronologic and anatomic age in early
life. J.A.M.A., 1908, 51, 1197-1205.
55
(18) Rotch, Thomas Morgan. The development of the bones in child-
hood studied by the Roentgen method, with a view of establish-
ing a developmental index for the grading of and the protection
of early life.Trans. Assoc. Am. Physicians, 1909, 24, 603.
(19) Rotch, Thomas Morgan. Roentgen-ray methods applied to grading
in early life, Am. Phy. Educ. 1910, 15, 396.
(20) Rotch, Thomas Morgan. A comparison in boys and girls of height,
weight, and epiphyseal development. Trans. Am. Pediatric
Soc., 1910, 22, 36-38.
(21) Rotch, Thomas Morgan. Living anatomy and pathology: The
diagnosis of diseases in early life by the Roentgen method.
Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott Co., 1910. Pp. 225.
(22) Rotch, Thomas Morgan and Smith, Harold Wellington. A study
of the development of the epiphyses of the hand and wrist for
the purpose of classifying cadets at Annapolis. Trans. Assoc.
Am. Physicians, 1910, 25, 200-11.
(23) Sawtell, Ruth Otis. Ossification and growth of children from one
to eight years of age. Am. J. Dis. Child., 1929, 37, 61-87.
(24) Sawtell, Ruth Otis. Sex differences in the bone growth of young
children. Am. J. Phys. Anthrop., 1928, 12, 293-302.
(25) Severson, Samuel O. The relation of the anatomical age to the
chronological, pedagogical, and mental ages with special refer-
ence to sex differences. Am. Assoc. Study Feebleminded.
1922, 46, 150-70.
(26) Shuttleworth, Frank K. Sexual maturation and the physical
growth of girls age six to nineteen. Monog. Soc. Res. Child
Develop., Vol. II, No. 5. Washington, D. C.: National Re-
search Council, 1937. Pp. 252.
(27) Smith, Harold W. Rotch method of Roentgenographic age deter-
mination. U. S. Naval Med. Bull., Vol. 7, No, 1, 1913.
Pp. 20.
(28) Todd, T. Wingate. Atlas of skeletal maturation. Vol. I. The
hand. St. Louis: Mosby, 1937. Pp. 202.
(29) West, Elmer D. Stage of ossification as a measure of growth
and its relation to intelligence test score. Doctoral dissertation,
Dept. of Education, Harvard Univ., 1935.
(30) West, Elmer D. Stage of ossification as a measure of growth
and its relation to intelligence test score. Harv. Teach., Rec.,
1936, 6, 162-68.
(31) Woodrow, Herbert. Brightness and dullness in children. J. B.
Lippincott Co., 1919.
56

Shuttleworth 1938

Uploaded by

Document Information

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Shuttleworth 1938

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Sexual Maturation and the Skeletal Growth of Girls Age Six to Nineteen

Author(s): Frank K. Shuttleworth

You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

MONOGRAPHS OF THE SOCIETY FOR RESEARCH IN

VOLUMEIII, No. 5 (SERIAL

SOCIETY FOR RESEARCH IN CHILD DEVELOPMENT

NATIONAL RESEARCH COUNCIL

The writer desires to express once more his deep

indebtedness to Mark A. May, Director of the Institute

of Human Relations, for his continued interest and

generous financial support of these studies of the growth

patterns of girls during the second decade of life.

Once more, also, the writer is indebted to Professor

Walter F. Dearborn for making available data col-

lected by the Harvard Growth Study. Mrs. Mary

Colton Ingham and Mr. Arthur O. Baggarly have as-

sumed a progressively larger share of the responsibility

for the statistical analysis and for the construction of

charts. Their labors have been indispensable. The

Works Progress Administration of Connecticut (Project

465-15-3-12) provided essentially all of the clerical

assistance so essential to the detailed statistical treat-

ment of the data.

LIST OF TABLES ...................................... iv

LIST OF FIGURES ........................................ v

I. THE PROBLEM ........................................ 1

II. HISTORICAL BACKGROUNDS, ORIGINAL DATA, AND

III. GROWTH TRENDS IN AVERAGE SIZE OF EARLY,

IV. PATTERNS OF GROWTH REVEALED BY ANNUAL IN-

V. CONTRASTING GROWTH PATTERNS OF THE TWELVE

VI. SUMMARY AND INTERPRETATIONS .................... 52

LITERATURE CITED ......................................... 55

1. Reliability of the Original Measurements .................... 9

2. Amount of Distortion in Increments at Ages 13.0, 13.5,

3. Growth Trends in Average Size of Twelve Skeletal

4. Generalized Patterns of Growth in Average Size ............. 15

5. Standard Deviations in Millimeters of Gross Figures and

6. Differentiation in Average Size According to Menarcheal

7. Correlations of Menarcheal Age with Growth Increments for

8. Ages at First and Second Inflection Points as Shown by

1. Growth trends in average skeletal age of three groups

2. Average annual increments in skelet;l age of three

3. Growth trends in average "ossification sums" of three

4. Average annual increments shown by "ossification sums"

5. Generalized patterns of average annual increments in the

6. X-ray illustrating the twelve measurements ................ 18

7. Growth trends in average first metacarpal length (above)

8. Growth trends in average fifth metacarpal length (below)

9. Growth trends in average first metacarpal transverse

10. Growth trends in average first metacarpal transverse

11. Growth trends in average fifth metacarpal transverse

19. Average annual increments in first metacarpal length

23. Average annual increments in fifth metacarpal transverse

33. Average annual increments in greater multangular diameter,

The writer has elsewhere presented in some detail the results of a

85- 1MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

- MENARCHE AFTER 13-5

175-MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

Fig. 3. Growthtrends in average Iossification sums' of three groups of girls

MENARCHE BEFORE 12-6

Fig. 4. Average annual increments shown by "ossification sums" of three groups of

HISTORICALBACKGROUNDS,ORIGINALDATA, AND PROCEDURES

2. Sources of Original Data

3. Methods of Measurement and Reliabilities