Toward an understanding of crowding: The role of physical interaction.

Abstract

It was hypothesized that the widespread failure of crowding studies to show decrements in task performance as a function of density was due to the omission of physical interaction from laboratory analogues of crowding Using male subjects, the present study manipulated density (high vs. low) and physical interaction (high vs. low) in a 2 X 2 design. It was found that decrements in performance on cognitive and behavioral components of the experimental task occurred only in the high density -high physical interaction condition Subjects did not differentially attribute their performance to task difficulty, effort, or ability. Also, their perceptions of crowding did not show the same pattern of results that was found on the performance measures. Thus, neither task attributions nor perceptions of crowding are seen as likely mediators of the performance decrements. The additional demands placed on attentional mechanisms and the goal blocking created by other subjects in the high densityhigh physical interaction condition are discussed as possible mediators of the performance effects One of the most surprising results of current research on crowding has been the lack of any consistent pattern of detrimental effects of high-density situations on either task performance or affective reactions in humans. Although Worchel and Teddlie (1976) have helped specify the determinants of the perception of crowding, the factors in high-density situations affecting performance are less clear. Whereas some researchers (Baum, Harpin, & Valins, 1975) have found that crowded living conditions adversely affect the nature and outcomes of social interactions, most evidence suggests that crowding does not produce decrements in task performance (Freedman, Klevansky, & Ehrlich, 1971;Kutner, 1973;Sherrod, 1974). There is even some evidence suggesting that high-density situations

Ego Depletion After Social Interference

“…Although Heller et al's (1977) as well as Langer and Saegert's (1977) findings are compatible with our assumption that social interference has adverse effects on self-control, they do not constitute sufficient evidence. Because the tasks were performed during the experience of social interference in supposedly highly sensory-demanding environments, increased cognitive load rather than reduced self-control strength might have impaired performance in these tasks.…”

“…Since social interference has been argued to be central in crowding (Schopler & Stockdale, 1977), the present findings suggest that it may be worthwhile to investigate self-control processes further, as an explanation of observed effects of crowding. As we have already mentioned in the introduction, Heller et al's (1977) as well as Langer and Saegert's (1977) findings on reduced task performance in crowded situations may, at least in part, be determined by diminished selfcontrol strength stemming from exposure to social interference. Further evidence that effects of crowding may be attributed to reduced self-control strength comes from studies on helping behaviour: A recent study that was theoretically based on the strength model of self-control demonstrated that initial depletion of self-control strength subsequently decreased participants' willingness to help others (DeWall, Baumeister, Gailliot, & Maner, 2008).…”

“…Participant and confederates were also instructed not to speak during the task (cf. Heller et al, 1977). After the instructions, the experimenter gave the start signal and immediately left the room.…”

“…In sum, there is evidence that adaptation to an uncontrollable physical environment (here: uncontrollable noise) subsequently leads to poorer self-control (Glass & Singer, 1972), that social interference has detrimental effects on performance in tasks that involve self-control (Heller et al, 1977;Langer & Saegert, 1977), and that social interactions which require adjustment impair subsequent self-control by reducing self-control strength (Finkel et al, 2006). Up to now, however, no study exists that has shown detrimental effects of social interference on self-control after the interference situation has ended, thus ruling out a cognitive capacity explanation.…”

“…Indirect evidence that social interference may impair selfcontrol stems from Heller, Groff, and Solomon (1977). They experimentally manipulated spatial density as well as the demand to move about the lab while performing tasks, such as sorting pages in a booklet and adding up numbers.…”