Speech 3050Final Project

Proxemics

Alexis Sependa Lori HughesKristian Moss Meredith HendricksonDevin Bevis

AbstractAbstract

This experiment studied the effects of proxemic violations of 80 subjects while taking into consideration the following variables: sex, age, and race. Experimenters violated intimate zones (less than 18 inches) of subjects on mall escalators. Subjects’ reactions to those violations were recorded, including their methods of maintaining their personal space. Although subjects expressed their discomfort with the intimate proximity through various nonverbal cues (affect, kinesics, and artifacts), none of the subjects used verbal cues

Terminology

According to Knapp & Hall (2002), territoriality means the “human tendency to stake out personal territory (or untouchable space)” (p. 8).

“Proxemics is the study of the use and perception of social and personal space” (Knapp & Hall, 2002, p. 8).

Body movement includes gestures, facial expressions, eye behavior, movements of the body, and posture (Knapp & Hall, 2002).

Terminology Ctd.

Facial expressions display emotional states. They also function as regulatory gestures which provide feedback and manage the flow of interaction (Knapp & Hall, 2002).

Eye behavior refers to where we look, when we look, and how long we look. Gaze specifically refers to eye movement made in the general direction of another’s face. Mutual gaze takes place when interactants look into each other’s eyes (Knapp & Hall, 2002).

In crowded settings people try to create psychological distance to reduce discomfort with intimate distance through decreased eye contact, body tenseness and immobility, and cold silence (Knapp & Hall, 2002).

Literature ReviewLiterature Review In one test, “results suggested that there was support of the hypothesis that in a

social situation between two people, if one person backs away from the other, then the person who did not back away will try and assume a position that seems comfortable for both parties.” Since this is considered a rather normal social response in proxemics, our violation of such a response will provoke the first party (who backed away) into furthering him or herself from the violator.

“Findings are in agreement with the basic premise of Schneirla’s approach/Withdrawal theory, which states that all animals have mechanisms which permit moving the body parts towards sources of low intensity or away from sources of high intensity.” (low intensity = low density or less populated areas / high intensity = high density / population)

In contract to our own hypothesis, one researcher explains that “The data on individual body orientation seem to suggest that the men in the over-60 age group maintained more direct body orientations than did the women in either the same age group or the women in the 40 to 50 age group. But when these findings are viewed in the overall context of the data for other age categories classified by individual gender, developmental trends for males and females may differ. Whereas men appear not to change their body orientations, women become more indirect after their 20s and 30s. As these findings Illustrate, however, this tendency is not found when women interact with other women (e.g., the 40 to 50 age group among female dyads maintained more direct body orientations than other age groups). In any event, these findings clearly do not support the view that women maintain more direct body orientations than do men because they have been socialized to be more supportive and attentive .” This researcher found that, in fact, men in the 60+ age group maintained the most direct body orientation than any other group.

Literature Review CtdLiterature Review Ctd. “Individuals under an intrusion on personal space seem to be in a state of enhanced

vigilance or even freezing, but not in tension relief, throughout the approach of the model and might also be defensive at a closer approach by the model” Anxiety and tension increased gradually as the model moved closer to the respondents. This is indicative of our own hypothesis for this proxemics experiment. With increased tension, a subject is more likely to desire to lessen the tension by placing a barrier (artifactual display), avoiding eye contact, or even total removal of themselves from the situation.

“The implicit norms in an organization lead managers to act in subtle ways that show little respect for the time, personal territory, and physical presence of their subordinates” This suggests that a person who has had their personal space violated will see the violator as trying to exercise authority over them and the space. If this seeming authority is unwelcome, subject is likely to try to usurp by reclaiming their personal space.

“87% of women allowed a male to violate their beach territory. The females approached by male intruders did not display excessive defensive emotional reactions and 75% of the women were either neutral or interested in being approached. Sparsely populated beaches attracted older women who displayed more defensive behaviors when approached.”This again reinforces the importance places on population density and location. For our own experiment, we chose a mall escalator which generally does not lend to meeting new people or the need to violate personal space as apposed to a beach where people are more likely to be receptive to invasions of personal space.

Research Questions

RQ1: Is there a difference in territory and proxemic preference based on race?

RQ2: Do men and women respond differently to territory invasions?

RQ3: Do different age groups act differently when maintaining personal space?

VariablesVariablesIndependent- Sex

- Male- Female

- Race- Black- White

- Age- 20 to 35 years- 36 to 59 years- 60 + years

Dependent- Affect Displays- Kinesics

remote eye contact / averted face

body positioning away from "violator"

crossed arms physical space (step or

walk away from "violator")- Artifactual Displays

object displacement (remove "violator" by using physical objects)

- Verbal Displays verbal affirmation of

discomfort verbal aggression

HypothesesHypotheses H1: Race and sex will be a factor in peoples’ level of comfort

with close proximity. Females will be more comfortable with a closer proximity and more frequent

proximity violations than males. African Americans will be more comfortable with a closer proximity and more

frequent proximity violations than Caucasians.

H2: People display their discomfort in levels starting with nonverbal / passive physical cues followed by verbal / aggressive physical cues

Remote eye contact/ averted face body positioning away from "violator" crossed arms physical space (step or walk away from "violator") object displacement (remove "violator" by using physical objects) verbal affirmation of discomfort verbal aggression physical aggression

Null Hypotheses

Ho1: There is no relationship between proxemics/territory and race.

Ho2: There is no relationship between proxemics/territory and age.

Ho3: There is no relationship between proxemics/territory and sex.

Method

The participants were 80 randomly selected people shopping in Lenox Square Mall, Perimeter Mall, and North Point Mall.

There were 30 males and 50 females. Seventeen males between 20-35 years old, 12 males between 36-59 years old, and 1 male over 60 years old. Thirteen African American males and 17 Caucasian males participated in the study.

Twenty-two females were between the ages of 20-35 years old, 21 females between 36-59 years old, and 7 females over 60 years old. Fifteen African American females and 35 Caucasian females participated in this study.

Method & ProcedureMethod & Procedure

02468

1012141618

Number of Subjects

20-35 yrs 36-59 yrs 60+ yrs

Age of Subjects

Demographic Data

Black Males

White Males

Black Females

White Females

Procedure

The experimenters (Lori, Devin, and Meredith) stood on the same escalator step as shoppers in the mall. The researchers (Alexis and Kristian) observed the reactions of the shoppers and recorded their demographics. We originally planned on passing out surveys to gather demographic information, but due to mall policy were unable to do this. The age, sex, and race of the shoppers were recorded by the researchers.

Results

Percentage of subjects that walked off the escalator before reaching the end compared to other kinesics behavior: Caucasian males: 30% African American males: 37% Caucasian females: 36% African American females: 50%

Percentage of subjects that exhibited affect displays: Caucasian males: 71% African American males: 85% Caucasian females: 71% African American females: 60%

Results

Percentage of subjects that exhibited kinesics: Caucasian males: 76% African American males: 62% Caucasian females: 80% African American females: 67%

Percentage of subjects that exhibit artifactual displays: Caucasian males: 29% African American males: 46% Caucasian females: 63% African American females: 53%

ResultsResults

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

Walk Away AffectDisplays

Kinesics ArtifactDisplay

Results

White Males

Black Males

White Females

Black Females

Results

Percentage of Affect displays by age: Female, 20-35, Caucasian: 75% Female, 36-59, Caucasian: 61% Female, 60+, Caucasian: 100% Male, 20-35, Caucasian: 63% Male, 36-59, Caucasian: 75% Male, 60+, Caucasian: 100% Female, 20-35, African American: 70% Female, 36-59, African American: 50% Female, 60+, African American: 0% Male, 20-35, African American: 89% Male, 36-59, African American: 75% Male, 60+, African American: 0%

ResultsResults

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

White Females White Males Black Females Black Males

Affect Displays By Age

20-35 yrs

36-59 yrs

60+ yrs

Results

Percentage of kinesics displays by age: Female, 20-35, Caucasian: 75% Female, 36-59, Caucasian: 78% Female, 60+, Caucasian: 100% Male 20-35, Caucasian: 88% Male, 36-59, Caucasian: 88% Male, 60+, Caucasian: 0% Female, 20-35, African American: 80% Female, 36-59, African American: 25% Female, 60+, African American: 0% Male, 20-35, African American: 67% Male, 36-59, African American: 50% Male, 60+, African American: 0%

Results

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

White Females White Males Black Females Black Males

Kinesics Display By Age

20-35 yrs

36-59 yrs

60+ yrs

Results

Percentage of artifactual displays by age: Female, 20-35, Caucasian: 58% Female, 36-59, Caucasian: 61% Female, 60+, Caucasian: 40% Male 20-35, Caucasian: 50% Male, 36-59, Caucasian: 25% Male, 60+, Caucasian: 0% Female, 20-35, African American: 40% Female, 36-59, African American: 50% Female, 60+, African American: 100% Male, 20-35, African American: 56% Male, 36-59, African American: 25% Male, 60+, African American: 0%

Results

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

White Females White Males Black Females Black Males

Artifactual Displays By Age

20-35 yrs

36-59 yrs

60+ yrs

ResultsResults

Percentage that walked off escalator by age: Female, 20-35, Caucasian: 42% Female, 36-59, Caucasian: 28% Female, 60+, Caucasian: 0% Male 20-35, Caucasian: 50% Male, 36-59, Caucasian: 13% Male, 60+, Caucasian: 0% Female, 20-35, African American: 50% Female, 36-59, African American: 0% Female, 60+, African American: 0% Male, 20-35, African American: 33% Male, 36-59, African American: 0% Male, 60+, African American: 0%

Results

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

50%

White Females White Males Black Females Black Males

Walk Away By Age

20-35 yrs

36-59 yrs

60+ yrs

Conclusions

RACE Affect displays remained stable regardless of

race. Kinesics changed based on race. The results

remained stable across gender within the race, but African Americans moved less than Caucasians.

Conclusions

SEX Men walked off the escalator more frequently

than the women, especially when the experimenter was of the same sex as the subject.

More often, when the experimenter was of the opposite sex, the subjects appeared confused or annoyed, but did not walk off the escalator before reaching the end.

Conclusions

AGE The highest rates of subjects walking away from the

experimenter were in the 20-35 year old category across both male/female and Caucasian/African American demographics.

Females, Caucasian and African American, had the highest rates of artifactual displays in the 36-59 age group, while males, had the highest rates in the 20-35 age group.

Kinesics displays appeared to be stable across age within the different categories such as Caucasian, female, except for African American females which had a 55% change between the 20-35 age group and the 36-59 age group.

Affect displays remained stable across age groups.

Conclusions

AFFECT DISPLAYS The most common gaze exhibited by the subjects was a

peripheral glance before focusing their eyes straight ahead for the rest of the time.

Many subjects exhibited rapid eye movement after first noticing the experimenter next to them. After a few seconds, the subjects went back to staring straight ahead or off the the side.

Most of the time the subjects had furrowed eyebrows and tight lips, displaying confusion, annoyance, and discomfort.

Conclusions

KINESICS (body movement) Most kinesics behavior involved moving closer to the

escalator railing, where the subjects either held the railing, rested their foot on the step above or below them, or leaned over the railing.

The most obvious kinesics behavior was when the subjects decided to walk off the escalator prior to reaching the end. Although most subjects moved only a few steps to escape the territory violation, some subjects went as far as to try to pass other people on the escalator to reach the bottom.

Women tended to hold onto their handbags, tap their fingers, and shift their weight.

Conclusions

ARTIFACTS Women had more artifacts to use as a buffer between

themselves and the experimenter compared with men. Most of the time, women held handbags or shopping bags

between themselves and the experimenters. Occasionally, women were on their cell phones.

Men most often used a cell phone up to their ear as a way to block out the presence of the experimenter and create privacy as their arm was raised covering the side of their face.

The only other item men generally possessed was a drink, rather coffee or milk shake, and they held it in the hand between themselves and the experimenter.

Conclusions

GENERAL Regardless of the subjects’ level of discomfort due to the territory

invasions, not a single person verbalized their feelings to the experimenter or anyone else while on the escalator. All displays of discomfort remained at the nonverbal level.

It appears that African Americans are to some extent less uncomfortable with close proximity than Caucasians, seen through the differences in kinesics behaviors.

Women and men tended to have similar amounts of kinesics behavior within their race suggesting that women are just as uncomfortable with territory violations as men are.

Age may play a role territory maintenance behavior as younger people regardless of sex and race tend to take action to get out of the situation or use more obvious artifacts as buffers during violations.

Research Limitations The subject population consisted only of African Americans and

Caucasians between the ages of 20-60+. Results cannot be generalized to other races/ethnicities.

There was a substantially larger number of white female subjects than any of the other variable groups.

Because of the constraints of the place of the experiment, variables (race, sex, age) had to be estimated by researchers.

Relational status could not feasibly be estimated by researchers and therefore was a variable that could have affected proximity violation responses but was not included.

Relative attractiveness of researchers violating personal space of subjects was not included as a factor in the study.

Population density would also be a factor. Although we tried to eliminate this by having our experiment on the escalator, responses could have been inhibited due to population density (i.e. person would have walked away if able to but was hemmed in and could not)

Research LimitationsResearch Limitations

There was not a sample of children and their response to territory invasion.

The subject population was too small to be able to draw any significant conclusions.

Although this study provided results of a correlational nature, causation could not be inferred.

Future Research

Future research should use a larger population sample size that measures races/ethnicities other than African American and Caucasian so that results may be generalized to the population as a whole.

Children should be included in future studies as their proxemic/territory needs may be different than those of adults.

Other variables should be introduced to see if they have an effect on territory invasion such as relationship status of the subjects and attractiveness of the experimenters.

References

Knapp, M. L. & Hall, J. A. (2002). Nonverbal communication in human interaction. (5th ed.) Australia: Wadsworth, pp. 8, 10, 113

Albas, Cheryll. (1991).Proxemic behavior: a study of extrusion. Journal of Social Psychology, 131, 697-702.

Remland, Martin (1981). Developing Leadership Skills in Nonverbal Communication: A Situational Perspective. Journal of Business Communication, 3, 18-29.

Syrop, Steven B. (1973). The Invasion and Defense of Personal Territory on Pacific Beaches: A Study in Human Ethology. Communication, 1, 130-145.

Remland, M. S., Jones, T. S., & Brinkman, H. (1995). Interpersonal distance, body orientation, and touch: effects of culture, gender, and age. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 281-297.

Sawada, Y. (2003). Blood pressure and heart rate responses to an intrusion on personal space. Japanese Psychological Research, 45(2), 115-121.

Jason, L. A., Reichler, A., & Rucker, W. (1981). Territorial behavior on beaches. The Journal of Social Psychology, 114, 43-50.

Buchanan, D. R., Goldman, M., & Juhnke, R. (1977). Eye contact, sex, and the violation of personal space. Journal of Social Psychology, 103,19-25.