Abstract
Puerto Rican children at the first-, sixth-, and eleventh-grade levels were observed interacting in same-sex dyads in two different cultural environments, New York and Puerto Rico. In accord with results obtained with other cultural groups, older children used larger interaction distances than did younger children. This development occurred later, however, for Puerto Rican children than had been reported for Americans of northern European ancestry. Further, Puerto Rican children and adolescents did not display the consistently reported sex differences in personal space preferences. Females did stand more directly with one another (face-to-face) though, and older children of both sexes interacted at more direct orientations than younger children. The results are discussed in the context of cultural differences in socialization practices.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Similar content being viewed by others
References
Aiello, J. R. and Aiello, T. D. The development of personal space: Proxemic behavior of children six through sixteen.Human Ecology, 1974,2, 177–189.
Aiello, J. R. and Jones, S. E. Field study of proxemic behavior of young school children in three subcultural groups.Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 1971,19, 351–356.
Aiello, J. R. and Thompson, D. E. Personal space, crowding, and spatial behavior in a cultural context. In I. Altman, J. F. Wohlwill, and A. Rapoport (Eds.),Human behavior and environment, Volume 4, Environment and culture. New York: Plenum Press, 1980.
Altman, I. and Vinsel, A. Personal space. An analysis of E. T. Hall's proxemics framework. In I. Altman and J. F. Wohlwill (Eds.),Human behavior and environment, Volume 2. New York: Plenum Press, 1977.
Baxter, J. C. Interpersonal spacing in natural settings.Sociometry, 1970,33, 444–456.
Ford, J. G. and Graves, J. R. Differences between Mexican-American and White children in interpersonal distance and social touching.Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1977,45, 779–785.
Greene, L. R. Effects of field independence, physical proximity and evaluative feedback on affective reactions and compliance in a dyadic interaction. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Yale University, 1973.
Harper, R. G., Wiens, A. N. & Matarazzo, J. D.Nonverbal communication: The State of the Art. New York: John Wiley and Sons, 1978.
Holly, M. Field dependence-independence, sophistication-of-body-concept, and social distance selection. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York University, 1972.
Holtzman, W. H., Diaz-Guerrero, R., & Swartz, J. D.Personality development in two cultures: A cross-cultural longitudinal study of school children in Mexico and the United States. Austin, Texas: University of Texas Press, 1975.
Justice, M. T. Field dependency, intimacy of topic, and interpersonal distance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of Florida, 1969.
Lomranz, J., Shapiro, A., Chomesh, N., and Gilat, Y. Children's personal space as a function of age and sex.Developmental Psychology, 1975,11, 541–545.
Nieves-Falcon, L.Diagnostico de Puerto Rico. Rio Piedras (PR): Edil, 1970.
Tennis, G. H. and Dabbs, J. M. Sex, setting, and personal space: First grade through college.Sociometry, 1975,38, 385–394.
Trego, R. E. An investigation of the rod and frame test in relation to emotional dependence and social cue attentiveness. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Texas Christian University, 1971.
Watson, O. and Graves, T. D. Quantitative research in proxemic behavior.American Anthropologist, 1966,68, 971–985.
Witkin, H. A., Dyk, R. B., Fateson, H. F., Goodenough, D. R. & Karp, S. A.Psychological differentiation. Potomac, Md.: Erlbaum, 1974.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Pagan, G., Aiello, J.R. Development of personal space among Puerto Ricans. J Nonverbal Behav 7, 59–68 (1982). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986868
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00986868