Reactions to interperson distance and topic intimacy: A comparison of strangers and friends

Baker, Ellen K.; Shaw, Marvin E.

doi:10.1007/bf00986511

Cited by 7 publications

(3 citation statements)

References 14 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A slight majority of investigations support the basic tenets of the equilibrium theory (Buchanan, Goldman, & Juhnke, 1977;Coutts & Ledden, 1977;Goldberg & Wellens, 1979;Greenbaum & Rosenfeld, 1978;Greenberg & Firestone, 1977;Hardee, 1976;Johnson & Dabbs, 1976;Knight, Langmeyer, & Lundgren, 1973;McAulay, 1977;Nottingham, 1979;Patterson, 1973aPatterson, , 1977Scherer & Schiff, 1973), and several other studies find at least partial support (Baker & Shaw, 1980;Coutts & Schneider, 1976;Eberts & Lepper, 1975;Hughes & Goldman, 1978;Lassen, 1973;Mooney, 1976;Sundstrom, 1978;Walden & Forsyth, 1981). More than a few studies do not support equilibrium theory (Breed, 1972;Carr & Dabbs, 1974;Castell, 1970b;Chapman, 1975;Kleinke et al, 1975;Lockard, McVittie, & Isaac, 1977;Marcelle, 1977;Schneider &Hansvick, 1977;Stephensen, Rutter, & Dore, 1973), but it seems that these are unlikely to discourage continued discussion of the theory.…”

Section: Equilibrium Theorymentioning

confidence: 88%

“…It is the cognitive and social carriers of sex effects, and not biological sex per se, that allow the expansion of female spaces, or the shrinking of male spaces, to become a feminist issue (Powers & Guess, 1976;Tipton, Bailey, & Obenchain, 1975). Ashton, Shaw, & Worsham, 1980Baker & Shaw, 1980Bouska & Beatty, 1978Brown, 1981Burgess, 1981Dean, Willis, & LaRocco, 1976Ford, Cramer, & Owens, 1977Greenberg, Aronow, & Rauchway, ' 1977Heckel & Hiers, 1977Hendrick, Giesen, & Coy, 1974Knowles, 1980aMallenby, 1974aNicosia et al, 1979Patterson, 1977Schneider & Hansvick, 1977Smith & Knowles, 1978Strube & Werner, 1982Thalhofer, 1980Thompson, Aiello, & Epstein, 1979Worchel & Yohai, 1979(8 additional studies cited in Hayduk, 1978) Polit & LaFrance, 1977Rosegrant & McCroskey, 1975Savinar, 1975Schwarzwald et al, 1977Severy, Forsyth, & Wagner, 1979Shuter, 1976Sobel & Lillith, 1975Sundstrom & Sundstrom, 1977Sussman & Rosenfeld, 1978Ugwuegbu & Anusiem, 1982Walden & Forsyth, 198! Walker & Borden, 1976Whalen et al, 1975Willis, Carlson, & Reeves, 1979Wittig & Skolnick, 1978<...>…”

Section: Sexmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Personal space: Where we now stand.

Hayduk

1983

Psychological Bulletin

378

336

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A review of the "personal space" research reveals that an overwhelming accumulation of evidence weighs against the use of projective measurement strategies, while the interrelations between the various real-life measures remain poorly documented. A "nondichotomous carrier mechanism" reconceptualization is proposed to reorient investigation of the confused pattern of sex effects. Other findings show that once data based on projective measures are discarded, it becomes clear that personal space gradually increases in size between 3–21 yrs of age. The evidence regarding cultural and subcultural differences in personal space is considerably weaker than has frequently been assumed. The present review further reveals that formerly implicit links between personal space and crowding have congealed into specific and fruitful theoretical parallels. The use of attribution, expectancy, and equilibrium theories in interpreting the results of personal space research is discussed, and the causes and consequences of personal space preferences are considered in terms of personality, situational effects, and acquaintanceship. (12 p ref)

show abstract

Section: Equilibrium Theorymentioning

confidence: 88%

Section: Sexmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personal space: Where we now stand.

Hayduk

1983

Psychological Bulletin

378

336

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The specific content or affective tone of the interaction is the next most important (Little, 1968). Interestingly, topic intimacy may not be an important factor determining spacing (Baker & Shaw, 1980).…”

Section: Interpersonal Space (Proxemics)mentioning

confidence: 99%

The body: Postures, gait, proxemics, and haptics.

Matsumoto

Hwang

Frank

2016

APA Handbook of Nonverbal Communication.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

An understanding of the complexity and comprehensiveness of the world of nonverbal behavior is not complete without a discussion of the many messages and signals produced by postures, body movements, space, and touch. When many people refer to "body language," in fact, they are referring to the messages and signals produced by the whole body, which we cover in this chapter. Although research on posture, whole body movements, space, and touch is not as mature as that on face, voice, gesture, gaze, or odor (see Chapters 10-14, this handbook), it is also equally clear that the whole body communicates a wealth of information about emotional states, cognitions, intent, personality, and attitudes. Below, we highlight the most important and exciting research findings with regard to postures, body movements, space, and touch, beginning with postures.

show abstract

Models of reactions to changes in nonverbal immediacy

Hale

Burgoon

1984

J Nonverbal Behav

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Reactions to interperson distance and topic intimacy: A comparison of strangers and friends

Cited by 7 publications

References 14 publications

Personal space: Where we now stand.

Personal space: Where we now stand.

The body: Postures, gait, proxemics, and haptics.

Models of reactions to changes in nonverbal immediacy

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About