Proxemics is one of several subcategories of the study of nonverbal communication. Prominent
other subcategories include haptics, kinesics, vocalics, and chronemics. Proxemics can be
defined as "the interrelated observations and theories of man's use of space as a specialized
elaboration of culture". Edward T. Hall, the cultural anthropologist who coined the term
in 1963, emphasized the impact of proxemic behavior on interpersonal communication. Hall
believed that the value in studying proxemics comes from its applicability in evaluating
not only the way people interact with others in daily life, but also "the organization
of space in [their] houses and buildings, and ultimately the layout of [their] towns.
In animals, Swiss zoologist Heini Hediger had distinguished between flight distance,
critical distance, personal distance, and social distance. Hall reasoned that, with
very few exceptions, flight distance and critical distance have been eliminated in human reactions,
and thus interviewed hundreds of people to determine modified criteria for human interactions.
In his work on proxemics, Edward T. Hall separated his theory into two overarching categories:
personal space and territory. Personal space describes the immediate space surrounding
a person, while territory refers to the area which a person may "lay claim to" and defend
against others. His theory on territoriality has been applied to animal behaviors as well;
defending territory is said to be a means of "propagation of the species by regulating
density".
Personal space The most portable types of space. A person's
personal space is carried with them everywhere they go. It is the most inviolate form of
territory. Body spacing and posture, according to Hall, are unintentional reactions to sensory
fluctuations or shifts, such as subtle changes in the sound and pitch of a person's voice.
Social distance between people is reliably correlated with physical distance, as are
intimate and personal distance, according to the delineations below. Hall did not mean
for these measurements to be strict guidelines that translate precisely to human behavior,
but rather a system for gauging the effect of distance on communication and how the effect
varies between cultures and other environmental factors.
Intimate distance for embracing, touching or whispering
Close phase – less than 6 inches Far phase – 6 to 18 inches
Personal distance for interactions among good friends or family members
Close phase – 1.5 to 2.5 feet Far phase – 2.5 to 4 feet
Social distance for interactions among acquaintances Close phase – 4 to 7 feet
Far phase – 7 to 12 feet
Public distance used for public speaking Close phase – 12 to 25 feet
Far phase – 25 feet or more.
In addition to physical distance, the level of intimacy between conversants can be determined
by "socio-petal socio-fugal axis", or the "angle formed by the axis of the conversants'
shoulders". Hall has also studied combinations of postures between dyads including lying
prone, sitting, or standing. These variations in positioning are impacted by a variety of
nonverbal communicative factors, listed below. kinesthetic factors
This category deals with how closely the participants are to touching, from being completely outside
of body-contact distance to being in physical contact, which parts of the body are in contact,
and body part positioning. touching code
This behavioural category concerns how participants are touching one another, such as caressing,
holding, feeling, prolonged holding, spot touching, pressing against, accidental brushing,
or not touching at all. visual code
This category denotes the amount of eye contact between participants. Four sub-categories
are defined, ranging from eye-to-eye contact to no eye contact at all.
thermal code This category denotes the amount of body heat
that each participant perceives from another. Four sub-categories are defined: conducted
heat detected, radiant heat detected, heat probably detected, and no detection of heat.
olfactory code This category deals in the kind and degree
of odour detected by each participant from the other.
voice loudness This category deals in the vocal effort used
in speech. Seven sub-categories are defined: silent, very soft, soft, normal, normal+,
loud, and very loud. Cultural factors
Hall notes that different cultures maintain different standards of personal space. The
Lewis Model of Cultural Types indicates the variations in personal interactive qualities,
indicating three poles: "linear-active" cultures, which are characterized as cool and decisive,
"reactive" cultures, characterized as accommodating and non-confrontational, and "multi-active"
cultures, characterized as warm and impulsive. Realizing and recognizing these cultural differences
improves cross-cultural understanding, and helps eliminate discomfort people may feel
if the interpersonal distance is too large or too small.
Territory There are four forms of human territory in
proxemic theory. They are: public territory
a place where one may freely enter. This type of territory is rarely in the constant control
of just one person. However, people might come to temporarily own areas of public territory.
interactional territory a place where people congregate informally
home territory a place where people continuously have control
over their individual territory body territory
the space immediately surrounding us These different levels of territory, in addition
to factors involving personal space, suggest ways for us to communicate and produce expectations
of appropriate behavior. Applied research
Much research in the fields of Communication, Psychology, and Sociology, especially under
the category of Organizational Behavior, has shown that physical proximity enhances peoples'
ability to work together. Face-to-face interaction is often used as a tool to maintain the culture,
authority, and norms of an organization or workplace. An extensive body of research has
been written about how proximity is affected by the use of new communication technologies.
The importance of physical proximity in co-workers is often emphasized.
In developing new communication technologies, the theory of proxemics is often considered.
While physical proximity cannot be achieved when people are connected virtually, perceived
proximity can be attempted, and several studies have shown that it is a crucial indicator
in the effectiveness of virtual communication technologies. These studies suggest that various
individual and situational factors influence how close we feel to another person, regardless
of distance. The mere-exposure effect originally referred to the tendency of a person to positively
favor those who they have been physically exposed to most often. However, recent research
has extended this effect to virtual communication. This work suggests that the more someone communicates
virtually with another person, the more he is able to envision that person's appearance
and workspace, therefore fostering a sense of personal connection. Increased communication
has also been seen to foster common ground, or the feeling of identification with another,
which leads to positive attributions about that person. Some studies emphasize the importance
of shared physical territory in achieving common ground, while others find that common
ground can be achieved virtually, by communicating often.
Cinema Proxemics is an essential component of cinematic
mise-en-scène, the placement of characters, props and scenery within a frame, creating
visual weight and movement. There are two aspects to the consideration of proxemics
in this context, the first being character proxemics, which addresses such questions
as: How much space is there between the characters? What is suggested by characters who are close
to each other? Do distances change as the film progresses? and, Do distances depend
on the film's other content? The other consideration is camera proxemics, which answers the single
question: How far away is the camera from the characters/action? Analysis of camera
proxemics typically relates Hall's system of proxemic patterns to the camera angle used
to create a specific shot, with the long shot or extreme long shot becoming the public proxemic,
a full shot becoming the social proxemic, the medium shot becoming the personal proxemic,
and the close up or extreme close up becoming the intimate proxemic.
Film analyst Louis Giannetti has maintained that, in general, the greater the distance
between the camera and the subject, the more emotionally neutral the audience remains,
whereas the closer the camera is to a character, the greater the audience's emotional attachment
to that character. Or, as actor/director Charlie Chaplin put it: “Life is a tragedy when
seen in close-up, but a comedy in long shot.” See also
References
Further reading T. Matthew Ciolek. "The Proxemics Lexicon:
a first approximation". Journal of Nonverbal Behavior 8: 55–75. doi:10.1007/BF00986330.
Edward T. Hall. "A System for the Notation of Proxemic Behaviour". American Anthropologist
65: 1003–1026. doi:10.1525/aa.1963.65.5.02a00020. Robert Sommer. "Sociofugal Space". The American
Journal of Sociology 72: 654–660. doi:10.1086/224402. Lawson, Bryan. "Sociofugal and sociopetal
space". The Language of Space. Architectural Press. pp. 140–144. ISBN 0-7506-5246-2.
External links Proxemics Research at the Wayback Machine
STEPHANIE ROSENBLOOM. "In Certain Circles, Two Is a Crowd". New York Times. Retrieved
27 July 2011. Wąs, J. A.; Gudowski, B. O.; Matuszyk, P.
J.. "Social Distances Model of Pedestrian Dynamics". "Cellular Automata". Lecture Notes
in Computer Science 4173. p. 492. doi:10.1007/11861201_57. ISBN 978-3-540-40929-8.