Tag Archive for Tolerances

Personal Space Distances

by  • March 5, 2013 • 0 Comments

There are four distances by which people interact. They are the “intimate distance” where only about eight inches or less separates two people, the “personal distance” from eighteen inches to five feet, the “social distance” which is from five to ten feet and the “public distance” which is from ten feet to twenty-five feet. We tolerate intimate distances for embracing, touching, or whispering from sexual partners, family members and occasionally, even friends. Personal space is reserved for good friends and those we have a fairly high level of trust. The social distance is reserved for acquaintances that we perhaps don’t fully trust yet, but otherwise need to interact with, and the public distance is that which we use to address large audiences.

An arm is extended to indicate that personal space is being violated and protect a personal space bubble.

An arm is extended to indicate that personal space is being violated and protect a personal space bubble.

Our personal space, the area next to our bodies, which we protect against intrusion, has been referred to as a “bubble”, since it encircles us, but it more closely resembles a cylinder. The cylinder encompasses our entire bodies, from our feet to our head. It is this cylinder that we protect rigorously, and when it is violated we tense up or back away so as to reduce or prevent additional overlap from the cylinders of others. Our personal space isn’t totally fixed either. It is constantly expanding and contracting depending on our environment and company. For example, we permit children, pets, and inanimate objects into our personal space regularly because we do not perceive them as a threat, but other adults must earn our trust before entering. Our personal space tolerances are directly related to the strength of our relationship.

When space is invaded, we pull back.

When space is invaded, we pull back.

In basic terms, our personal space zone is the perimeter that we feel is suitable to act as a buffer should a dangerous situation arise. It provides us with enough time and space, we think, to react and mount a defensive posture to protect ourselves from an attack. In a busy public area, we might tolerate (although not prefer) moderate contact due to space limitations, but when space is abundant we see even mild intrusions as a predictors of an attack. Our personal space zone, therefore, is an early warning system that we use to help us predict the intensions of others.

These zones and distances are not immutable and universal, but are meant as a guide or rule of thumb. Everyone has different levels of comfort based upon their upbringing, personality type, gender, age and so forth. The summary listed below is a guideline that is meant for those living in areas such as Australia, Canada, United States, Great Britain and New Zealand or other westernized countries such as Iceland and Singapore or Guam. For other countries not listed, the zones may expand or contract based on the inverse of their density. For example, Japan and China which have a high density have smaller intimate zone distances. There is an inverse correlation to each zone, where the greater the population density, the tighter the zones.

The safest way to test a person’s need for personal space is to move close, lean in, give a hearty but not overly aggressive handshake, then take a step back to allow the person to either move in closer to shrink the space between you and them or take a step backward, to suite a larger than average personal space requirements. Too often people will move in too tight and overshadow someone else only to make them uncomfortable. If someone requires less space, they won’t feel offended to take up the space between you, and if you care anything about them, you won’t feel a need to step backwards either. Shrinking space is a way for people to tell you that they enjoy you, and your company, and one that you should not take offense to, but rather use as a measure of someone’s level of comfort.

Personal Space Distances

Personal Space Distances

1. Intimate zone – eight inches and less. This is our intimate space which we protect vigorously. We permit only those we trust emotionally to enter including parents, children, friends, lovers, relatives and pets. Lovers (and pets) are the only ones we permit to enter for any length of time, the rest we allow entry for only short instances such as for hugs.

2. Personal zone – eight inches to five feet. This is the distance from which we communicate to acquaintances; those we have achieved some level of trust. Examples include bosses and fellow employees, friends of friends, and so forth.

3. Social zone – five feet to ten feet. Normal for people on a first encounter such as people on the street asking for directions, a clerk at a store, strangers at a supermarket and other people we don’t know very well. Here we struggle between conflicting needs, one is to maintain enough space for comfort and the other is to be close enough to communicate effectively.

4. Public zone – ten feet to twenty-five feet. This is the zone at which it is comfortable to address a large group of people or audience during a presentation or speech. Even if we know all the members of the group well, we still maintain a greater distance from them so we can easily address all of them and keep everyone in our field of view. This could be an evolutionary adaptation since a large group could easily contain rogue defectors. By getting too close to an audience we risk surprise attack which is why we feel more comfortable with a wider buffer. Then again, it could simply be a function of judging the efficacy of our speech by measuring the audience’s reaction.

Introduction – Chapter 4

by  • March 5, 2013 • 0 Comments

The "luncheon test" is a fun territorial game. To play it, simply advance restaurant artifacts from your side to the other piece-by-piece over the course of a meal. Start with the condiments (salt, pepper, ketchup, etc.) then move onto your own personal items such as your drink, an empty salad bowl, use napkins and so forth. Watch how your guest response. Do they push the items back to reclaim land, or do they ease back in their chair and let you have the extra space you seem to require?

The “luncheon test” is a fun territorial game. To play it, simply advance restaurant artifacts from your side to the other piece-by-piece over the course of a meal. Start with the condiments (salt, pepper, ketchup, etc.) then move onto your own personal items such as your drink, an empty salad bowl, use napkins and so forth. Watch how your guest response. Do they push the items back to reclaim land, or do they ease back in their chair and let you have the extra space you seem to require?

As a species, we have clear definitions and rules protecting ownership of our possessions for the purpose of maintaining order and reducing conflict. Territoriality describes the set of rules that govern the space around our bodies with emphasis on how we communicate ownership. A territory is defined as the space or area around a person that is claimed as their own, to the exclusion, or inclusion, of all others as they see fit. Territoriality is a key part of the human condition even though it is rarely thought about. The land our houses sit upon is owned by us and we prove this to others by way of a deed and unfortunately by the taxes we pay for the right to keep it. Most of the things inside our houses are also ours and we prove this through shear possession, unless we save our purchase receipts. There are also things we own but that occupy space that is shared by our communities, or that neighbouring communities. Our cars are owned by us, yet move about the territories of others.

Fences around our homes have become commonplace showing a greater need for us to protect what little space we own, in a rapidly expanding population, that finds itself in a shrinking community. Apartment style housing and condominiums however, prove that as land availability shrinks, our tolerance for density is increasing. As we shall see, habitation density controls personal space tolerances, that is, it controls how much empty space we require around our bodies when near other people. However we look at property and personal space, one thing is true, everyone fights to defend it.

We see this battle amongst children who fight for the front passenger seat in an automobile or among college students for the best seat on the sofa. We can also see it with office employees who fight for the best seats at the conference table, or even the best offices (usually the biggest or with the brightest window or best view). Once a territory is claimed, ownership is marked. We can mark our territory by leaving personal artifacts such as a jacket across the back of a chair or a book on a seat to reserve it. We sometimes even go so far as hiring friends as guards to hold and protect our territories when space is limited, or hold our cue in line. Status in a hierarchy alone can serve to protect territories. For example, no one would contest the boss’s or Dad’s seat at the head of the table. Curiously even habit can reserve a territory. Seating in large auditoriums (several hundred seats) in university settings is rarely assigned, yet habit says that students sit in the same general areas class after class, while most sit in the very same seat each lecture. Being usurped of a seat that has been reserved through this repeated claim can be upsetting even though no written rules exist.

As spaces become more crowded our natural response is to guard our territories with even more fervor. Cues and lines are a prime example. The longer the line and greater the wait, the more aggression people will hold against those that jump cue. Disney world has a strict no cue jumping policy for this reason. Cues are an interesting way of defining territory if you really think about it. Cues are eternally moving, and changing, yet we guard our relation to others and our nearness to our goal, whatever it might be. It has been shown that particularly violence-prone individuals such as criminals tend to have much wider personal space requirements than regular people. What seems like miles to us, might seem like inches to them. This is why respecting nonverbal body language that indicates aggression related to space invasion is vitally important so we don’t cause what is called “intrusion panic.” Incidentally, babies also suffer from panic when strangers get to close so respecting personal space goes across all people (animals too), and even while driving – hence the term “road rage.” Setting someone off who has tendencies to react physically can be disastrous and we never really know what type of person we are interacting with at a given occasion since we deal with so many strangers on a daily basis.

By examining a crowded beach area we can see rules that create territories. Our friends and family will ban together with towels and other beach artifacts to ward off others. The efficiency of the group due to its common interest allows it to expand by creating space amongst and between its members producing even more space for itself, a luxury not experienced by a single person or even a couple. Banding with others creates strength and when interests align we tend to clump and form pairs, clans, gangs, groups and so forth. If a new or better stake of land becomes available we quickly motion our troops to action, we pull up stake, and move quickly. In high stakes environments we might even send a brave individual from our clan to put up the first claim. Usually we follow first come takes claim because it is found to be a fair enough rule to abide by. Because we live in a civilized society and we jostle over generally trivial stakes our rules prohibit physical altercations.

Above: How close is too close.

High/Low Context, Culture And Touching

by  • March 5, 2013 • 0 Comments

Leaning away is a signal that personal space is being invaded.

Leaning away is a signal that personal space is being invaded.

The term “personal space” was first used by psychologist Robert Sommer in 1969 to describe the comfortable zones that people like to keep around them. His observations stemmed from the uneasiness experienced by hospital patients when he encroached on them. Further research into personal space has found that closeness tolerances vary by culture, and so too does touch. For example, Americans tend to prefer large amounts of space whereas Latin Americans, Italians and Middle Easterners require far less. Americans come from a culture with what is called “low context” and those from the middle-east come from “high context” cultures. In a high context culture the rules for conduct do not have to be specifically outlined or verbalized because everyone already knows them. Thus, in a high context culture the rules are set and the countries demographics doesn’t vary widely from person to person. High context cultures have a long standing history so practically everyone in the country understands the rules of touching. In a low context culture, where the individual is valued more than the that of the whole, touching is far less frequent or tolerated. In a low context culture the content of speech is delivered through words instead of touching. Examples of low context cultures where touching is infrequent includes America, Germany, Japan, United Kingdom, and Australia. High context countries where touching is more frequent includes the Middle East, Asia, Africa, Italy, Latin America and South America. Middle ground countries include France, China and India.

A business man from Australia visiting Italy or France can be shocked to have a potential business partner touch over coffee to emphasize a point. Those unaware of their host’s cultural norms could misrepresent touching as a sexual advance especially if your company is of the opposite sex. Then again, touch avoidance might also be misconstrued as rude or standoffish to a high context culture. An attempt should be made to follow cultural norms out of respect so in a high context culture one must fight the natural urge to pull back to avoid offending and in a low context culture we should respect their need for privacy and personal space by limiting touching.

Here is a quick breakdown of countries by touch tolerances:

[A] English-speaking countries (Canada, United States), Australia, Japan and northern Europe. Avoid casual touching.
[B] China, France, India. Accept some casual touching.
[C] Latin America, South America, Africa, the Mediterranean, Middle East, Italy, Russia and parts of Asia. Freely use casual touching.