I've transcribed these from a graph in the following publication:
--------------------------------------------------------
The Journal of Urology. Volume 156(3), September 1996, pp 995-997
Penile Length in the Flaccid and Erect States: Guidelines for Penile Augmentation
Wessells, Hunter; Lue, Tom F.; McAninch, Jack W.
-----------------------------------------------------------
They are nbp erect lengths in cms. The study was of 80 men, but on the graph there is simply a dot on each point - some of the dots clearly indicate more than one man (there are only 74 of them), but it's impossible to tell which.
This is quite a well-known study, it found the average to be 12.89 with a s.d. of 2.91, but I thought it was interesting to see some more detail.
7.5: 2
8.0: 3
8.5: 1
9.0: 2
9.5: 3
10: 4
10.5:4
11: 4
11.5:4
12: 6
12.5:5
13: 4
13.5: 3
14: 5
14.5: 4
15: 1
15.5: 3
16: 5
16.5: 2
17: 2
17.5: 1
18: 3
18.5: 0
19: 3
--------------------------------------------------------
The Journal of Urology. Volume 156(3), September 1996, pp 995-997
Penile Length in the Flaccid and Erect States: Guidelines for Penile Augmentation
Wessells, Hunter; Lue, Tom F.; McAninch, Jack W.
-----------------------------------------------------------
They are nbp erect lengths in cms. The study was of 80 men, but on the graph there is simply a dot on each point - some of the dots clearly indicate more than one man (there are only 74 of them), but it's impossible to tell which.
This is quite a well-known study, it found the average to be 12.89 with a s.d. of 2.91, but I thought it was interesting to see some more detail.
7.5: 2
8.0: 3
8.5: 1
9.0: 2
9.5: 3
10: 4
10.5:4
11: 4
11.5:4
12: 6
12.5:5
13: 4
13.5: 3
14: 5
14.5: 4
15: 1
15.5: 3
16: 5
16.5: 2
17: 2
17.5: 1
18: 3
18.5: 0
19: 3