Preferred Interpersonal Distance Research Articles

Don't stand so close to me: A behavioral and ERP study of preferred interpersonal distance

The space between people, or interpersonal distance, creates and defines the dynamics of social interactions. Given that invasion of one's interpersonal space may trigger threat and anxiety, a critical question is if high vulnerability to social anxiety (SA) is associated with avoidance and attentional biases when anticipating invasion to one's interpersonal space. Therefore, the current study sought to examine the behavioral mechanisms, time course and neural correlates underlying the threat of interpersonal distance invasion with a focus on different SA levels, using both a behavioral and an ERP experiment. Preferred interpersonal distance was assessed using a paradigm that involves responding to different virtual protagonists (friend or stranger) approaching the participant by indicating where one would like the protagonist to stop. In addition, participants' level of social anxiety was measured. The behavioral experiment indicated that levels of SA predicted one's preferred interpersonal distance such that higher SA individuals preferred further distance from a stranger. At the neural level, across groups, early (N1) but not late (LPP) differences were found between stranger and friend conditions. Importantly, SA individuals were characterized by attenuated early ERP responses, suggesting less attentional resources allocated to social stimuli. The results suggest that high SA individuals feel discomfort earlier than others in social engagement, which may lead them to stand further away, thus creating less communicative social interactions.

The menstrual cycle and personal space

Sixty undergraduate women were individually tested for interpersonal distance preferences by either a male or female confederate who approached each subject from six different directions using a procedure reported by Kinzel (1970). Randomly, each participated during either the four days prior to menstrual flow (premenstrual), the four days beginning with the first day of flow (menstrual), or the four days midway between the onset of their last period and the estimated beginning of the next (midcycle). Unexpectedly, interpersonal distance preferences were greater for males than for female testers only during the midcycle phase. Moos Menstrual Distress Questionnaire scores were not reliably correlated with interpersonal distance preferences, nor were questionnaire items tapping extent of sexual experience, usage of birth-control pills, or concern about menstrual odor. Ratings of the attractiveness of the person doing the testing was inversely related to the preferred interpersonal distance with the exception of midcycle subjects. Both negative affect and sexual interest interpretations of the effects of menstrual cycle on personal space are discussed.

Prediction of performance on the International Biomedical Expedition to the Antarctic (IBEA)

AbstractBiographical variables, clinical ratings and psychological tests were used to predict performance of the eleven subjects involved in the International Biomedical Expedition to the Antarctic. The results showed that of the biographical predictors, past polar experience and age were best for predicting low stress and high arousal. Of the clinical predictions those made by a psychologist who had access to both interviews and psychometric material, and had been to the Antarctic, were more accurate than those of two other psychologists who had access to only the psychometric material and had not been there. Of the psychological tests, the initial stress scores were found to be good predictors of later stress and arousal, the initial arousal scores to be good predictors of later stress and self adaptation ratings, and the preferred interpersonal distance scores to be good predictors of independent observer ratings and peer ratings of adaptability.

The Relationship between Interpersonal Distance and Violence in Imprisoned Offenders

A 12-month follow-up of 73 prison inmates who had completed a video measure of preferred Interpersonal Distance (IPD) showed that those who had been involved in fights during the follow-up period had significantly higher IPD scores. Further classification into subgroups identified a very high IPD group who had a previous record of violence and who were the aggressors in fights in prison, and a very low IPD group who had no record of violence and were not involved in fights except as victims. A discriminant function analysis indicated that IPD score was the variable which best predicted fighting in prison. This analysis derived a function from which it was possible to predict fighting behavior with a 71% rate of success.

Psychological tension and closeness to others: stress and interpersonal distance preference.

The prediction that increased tension would lead to a preference for greater distance from others was tested on 40 male and 40 female Ss approached in eight natural settings of high or low tension and their distance preference measured. Ss in the four higher-tension situations indicated a preference for significantly more distance. Self-reported tension was correlated significantly and positively with the distance preferred across all eight situations. There was no effect of sex.

An Unobtrusive Apparatus for Measuring Interpersonal Distances.

A relatively unobtrusive apparatus, the Interpersonal Distance Mat (IDM), is described as a means of acquiring immediate and accurate measures of interpersonal distances. Two brief experiments tested the sensitivity of the apparatus to gender differences in preferred interpersonal distance. Results from 78 male and 93 female American college students indicate that female/female dyads selected closer interaction distances than male/male dyads, but that freedom of movement may be a necessary factor in this relationship.

Effects of situational stress and sex on interpersonal distance preference.

The prediction that people prefer greater distance between themselves and others when they anticipate a stressful situation was tested. The sex of the "other" was expected to have an interactive effect on distance preference. Written descriptions of settings in which people anticipated future situations of high and low stress were presented and Ss indicated seating preference. When anticipating more stressful situations, more distance from another person was preferred. Males preferred to sit closer to the opposite sex while females preferred to sit closer to the same sex. These findings are consistent with an interpretation of interpersonal distance as a moderator of stress. The sex of the Ss and of their interaction partners must be considered in studies of interpersonal distance preference.

Crowding and the Role of Interpersonal Distance Preference

Crowding and the Role of Interpersonal Distance Preference

Personality characteristics related to cross-situational consistency of interpersonal distance.

Explored the relation of personality dimensions to cross-situational consistency in interpersonal distance. Sixty-five male and 52 female undergraduates were given the Personality Research Form A and the Maudsley Personality Inventory as well as four forms of a measure of interpersonal distance preference which covered 10 different situations. The relationship between the personality dimensions and the consistency of interpersonal distance choice was measured by multiple regression. Neuroticism emerged as having the most reliable relation to consistency, confirming previous data in this area. Multiple Rs ranging from .36 to .53 indicated that consistency may be reliably related to personality dimensions and that conceptualizing consistency as an individual difference or moderating variable may partially explain the difficulty in predicting directly from personality dimensions as the situation varies.

RACE, SETTING, AND ACTOR-TARGET DIFFERENCES IN PERSONAL SPACE

This study examines the effects of race, setting and type of approach upon interpersonal distance preferences among black and white female undergraduate students. Subjects were tested two at a time in same-race pairs, using both direct and indirect measures in corner and center settings as each subject approached and was approached by her partner, Direct measures showed interpersonal distance to be greater in the corner than in the center setting and greater when subjects were approached by than when approaching their partner, but there was no significant effect for race of subject. Indirect measures showed no effects. Interactions showed the effects of type of approach depended to some extent upon both race and setting.

The effects of race and sex on Proxemic behavior in an interview setting

This study investigated the effects of race and sex on interpersonal distance preferences of interviewees in a dyadic interview setting with a stranger. Interviewees in male‐male dyads established greater interpersonal distance than did interviewees in any dyad including at least one female. White interviewees established greater interpersonal distance from black interviewers than any other racial combination. Female‐black interviewees established closer interpersonal distance to all interviewers than did any other sex‐race interviewee combination.

Use of Comfortable Interpersonal Distance Scale in High School Students: Replication

To study the developmental aspects of psychological distance or personal space (2, 3, 4), the present authors developed a paper-and-pencil technique to assess the effects of differential stimuli on preferred interpersonal distance (1). Results indicated that persons of different races were always kept at greater distances than stimulus persons of the same race and that opposite-sex stimuli, in the adolescent population, were permitted to come closer than stimuli of the same sex. These sex differences, using the group-administered Comfortable Interpersonal Distance scale, were not unlike those previously reported (4). The present paper reports a replication using a different population of high school students. It was expected that findings would be repeated. Ss were 31 males and 31 females, aged 14 and 15 yr., from the student body of a suburban high school in the Southeast. The method was that described by Duke and Nowicki (1). Stimulus persons were black and white and male and female. Ss were required to indicate the distance at which they would feel comfortable with a stimulus person's closeness. Analysis of variance of distances indicated that, as in the first study, stimulus type significantly affected Ss' distance (P = 84.87, df = 3/180, p < ,001). When Neuman-Keuls' analyses were applied to these data, same sex-same race stimuli were held significantly farther away than stimulus persons of opposite sex but same race (M of 45.29 mm. and 15.87 mm. respectively); blacks of the opposite sex were held farther away than blacks of the same sex (M of 57.67 mm. and 46.43 mm. respectively, p = .05). These results replicate those observed in the original sample. Also, the interaction of sex of S by race was also significant (F = 5.21, df = 3/180, p = .01) . Males tended to keep aU stimuli farther away than females with the exception of persons of opposite sex-same race, i.e., white females. Again, this replicates an earlier result. The only finding which did not hold was direction of approach. In the initial sample, Ss preferred significantly greater distances when the stimulus persons approached from behind them and out of their field of vision. This effect did not occur for the present sample. Meisels and Guardo (4) have reported that this is a developmental phenomenon which begins to appear in adolescence. It may be that the variance of differences in developmental levels in the present sample washed out any consistent effects. Generally, the Comforrable Interpersonal Distance scale produced reasonable data from this sample. Study of different age groups may help determine whether the stability and validity of the measure makes it tenable for more extended use.