As human being, we behave in physical settings. The point is an obvious one. What is not so obvious are the ways in which the nature, organization, and meaning of various physical settings influence our behaviour and experience.
Consider the behavioural consequences produced by such natural conditions as terrain, climate, and vegetation, and such human-built aspects as streets, study halls, hospital wards, schoolrooms, bedrooms, subway trains, apartment houses, and shopping centres. “Spaces and places” affect our sense of self-esteem, infant-care practices, the mutual hostility of ethnic groups, the anxiety or tranquillity of the shut-in, the productivity of workers, illness, accident rates, life expectancies, and the study of behaviour.
Space is not neutral. It has social meaning also. Many of the terms we use to refer to status are based on spatial analogies: “central figures”, dominant position”, “head chair”, “upper echelon”, and “high status”.
This is not surprising; territory and privilege usually go hand in hand. The “big boss” can walk into a subordinate’s office unannounced, but the subordinate must wait outside the boss’s office for an invitation. If the boss is on the phone, the subordinate may unobtrusively peek into the room, see that the boss is busy, and tiptoe off. But if a subordinate is on the phone, the boss enters and asserts his or her status by standing above the subordinate until the subordinate murmurs, “let me call you back later.”
In office buildings, firms frequently reserve the highest floor for their top-ranking personnel. On any given floor, the highest ranking employees receive the corner offices, the next in rank have offices with windows, the lesser-ranked occupy partitioned cubicles with no windows, and the lowest in rank sit at desks in an open room.
How do people use the space around them to regulate their social interactions? This is one of the questions asked by environmental researchers, who use the term proxemics to refer to the study of human spatial behaviour. A key idea is that individuals try to achieve an optimal degree of involvement and physical closeness with other people, depending on the specific situation. In other words, people use space to influence their interaction with other people.
Personal Space: How close to other people do you usually stand? Does it make any difference if they are friends, strangers, or members of your family ? Does it make any difference if you are standing at a party, or in line at the post office?
As these examples suggest, people have various preferred distances for social interaction, depending on whom they are with and the activity. People treat the physical space immediately around them as though it were a part of themselves; this zone has been called personal space.
Personal space refers to an area with an invisible boundary surrounding the person’s body into which intruders may not come. In social interactions, people try to maintain an acceptable balance between being too close for comfort and being awkwardly distant.
Personal space has been likened to the shell of a snail and to an aura, halo, or “invisible bubble” that surrounds a person. It is not spherical, however. The distance that individuals seek to maintain between themselves and their fellows tends to be an irregularly shaped “balloon”. People demand more space directly in front of their faces than at their backs, and less at their ankles than at their waists and heads. Significantly, blind people requires spaces virtually identical in size, shape, and permeability to those required by sighted persons.
Edward T. Hall (1966), an anthropologist, has contributed to our knowledge of how people formulate definitions of the situation in terms of spatial distance. On the basis of observations and interviews, Hall identifies four distances:
Intimate Distance: From 0 to 18 inches. This is the distance for making love and showing warmth in friendships. Children clinging to a parent, mother nursing an infant and couple making love — all are using this space. Speaking tends to be very low or even in a whisper.
Personal Distance: From 18 inches to 4 feet. At this distance, individuals can still hold or grasp hands. Wives and husbands often find it threatening if another woman or man moves into this zone with their partner, since it may signal that the person has designs on their spouse. Conversations are carried on in soft voices indoors and at moderate volume outside.
Social Distance: From 4 to 7 feet. We use this distance when we say to another, “stand away so I can look at you”. It is the range at which office desks hold visitors; it enables a boss to remain seated and look up at a subordinate without losing status. It requires continual eye contact, or else the other person is shut out and the conversation is terminated. Voices are notably louder and can usually be heard in an adjoining room if the door remains open.
Public Distance: From 12 to 25 feet. At this distance our words and sentences become more formal and carefully chosen. It is suited to a variety of gatherings, including small classroom settings involving a lecturer and students. Or in situations of possible danger at this distance an alert person can take evasive or defensive action. More than 25 feet distance given to important public figures such as the President of the country. Speaking is at full voice.
Territorial Behaviour: People often lay claim to a particular place as “theirs”. Have you ever arrived at the university’s point only to find that every seat is taken? Some seats are physically occupied, and the rest are “staked out” with bags, books, and other markers. In such a situation, you might consider whether or not to move someone’s belongings and take the seat, but you will probably think better of it, not wanting to face an argument.
A territory is an area controlled by a specific individual or group. Psychologist Irwin Altman (1975) has distinguished three main types of human territories: primary, secondary, and public. A primary territory such as a home or private office is clearly under personal control. A secondary territory such as a canteen may be used regularly by members of a group. In contrast, a public territory such as a seat on a bus is available to all interested parties on a first come first served basis.
Territorial behaviours are actions designed to stake out or mark a territory and to claim ownership. Territorial markers are objects or nonverbal gestures that people use to mark and personalise their territory. They often serve a protective function and let others know that a particular area is claimed.
Crowding: When physical space is limited and we are forced to share it with others, we may feel crowded. Popular belief has it that crowding is bad for people. It is said to breed violence, crime, family breakdown, mental illness, addiction, and suicide. The belief that high density produces pathology comes in part from studies of animal populations. These findings reveal that after population buildups, interaction intensifies, leading to progressively greater levels of stress.
In studying its influence, social psychologists make a distinction between density and crowding. Density is a physical condition of population that involves spatial limitations. Crowding is the perception people have of themselves as receiving excessive stimulation from social sources. This distinction draws attention to the social factors that influence people’s definitions of situations and lead them to differing judgments of being crowded or uncrowded.
Privacy: Privacy involves the claim of individuals or groups to determine for themselves when, how, and to what extent information about themselves is communicated to others.
When researchers asked a sample of children and adolescents what privacy meant to them, four predominant themes emerged: “ controlling access to information,” “being alone,” “no one bothering me”, “controlling access to space”. In sum, privacy represents people’s attempt to control their transactions with others so as to enhance their autonomy and minimize their vulnerability.
Societies of the world differ in the extent to which they attempt to minimize or maximize privacy. They handle privacy differently. Americans gain privacy by going to their rooms and closing the doors. Arabs, in contract, have no sense of physical privacy; they even lack a word for privacy. Since privacy is “internal”, Arabs who want to be alone simply stop talking. The English do likewise. Arabs and English who shut themselves off in this way are not indicating that anything is wrong, but merely that they want to be alone with their thoughts. Americans who show displeasure toward Arabs and English by giving them “the silent treatment” will obviously fail in their purpose; this behaviour will not be interpreted as anything out of the ordinary.
Despite our preoccupation with physical privacy, Americans find the German approach to space difficult to grasp. To Germans, an entire room of their home can be a bubble of privacy. Germans conceive of space as an extension of the ego. Not surprisingly, Germans build sand-castle walls around their chosen spot on a public beach.
Individual Differences: Here I briefly present some individual differences related to human spatial behaviour.
Agoraphobia is generally a fear of open spaces. It is the most commonly cited phobic disorder of those persons who seek psychiatric or psychological treatment. It has a variety of manifestations, the most common being a deep fear of being caught alone in some public place.
Some individuals use space exceptionally well than normal persons. Rock climbing, sky diving, wind surfing, hand gliding - in all of these, people use space with an adventurous spirit and referred to as sensation seekers.
Individual differences in reactions to social density may reflect differences in preferred level of stimulation.
