Skip to main content

Investigating the Comfort Distance of Chinese in Eight Directions

  • Conference paper
  • First Online:
Man–Machine–Environment System Engineering (MMESE 2019)

Part of the book series: Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering ((LNEE,volume 576))

Included in the following conference series:

Abstract

The aim of the study was to investigate the preferred comfort distance that Chinese people keep between themselves and others. An experiment was carried out to measure the comfort distance around participants, and the gender effect of the participant was evaluated. Twenty-eight participants (15 females) were recruited in the experiment. All the participants were asked to stand naturally when a confederate approaching them. The comfort distances between participants and confederates in the eight directions (0°, 45°, 90°, 135°, 180°, 225°, 270°, 315°) were collected to analyze. The results indicated that the comfort distance in the front was larger than that in the lateral and rear. In addition, there was no significant difference between male and female participants on the comfort distance under the selected eight directions. The study could contribute to the research on the social interactions of Chinese.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hall ET (1966) The hidden dimension. Doubleday, New York

    Google Scholar 

  2. Hayduk LA (1983) Personal space: where we now stand. Psychol Bull 94:293–335

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Gifford R, Sacilotto PA (1993) Social isolation and personal space: a field study. Can J Behav Sci 25:165–174

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Dosey MA, Meisels M (1969) Personal space and self-protection. J Pers Soc Psychol 11:93–97

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Kennedy DP, Gläscher J, Tyszka JM et al (2009) Personal space regulation by the human amygdala. Nat Neurosci 12:1226–1227

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. Gessaroli E, Santelli E, di Pellegrino G et al (2013) Personal space regulation in childhood autism spectrum disorders. PLoS ONE 8:e74959

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Iachini T, Coello Y, Frassinetti F et al (2014) Body space in social interactions: a comparison of reaching and comfort distance in immersive virtual reality. PLoS ONE 9:e111511

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Remland MS, Jones TS, Brinkman H (1995) Interpersonal distance, body orientation, and touch: effects of culture, gender, and age. J Soc Psychol 135:281–297

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Uzzell D, Horne N (2006) The influence of biological sex, sexuality and gender role on interpersonal distance. Br J Soc Psychol 45:579–597

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Sussman NM, Rosenfeld HM (1982) Influence of culture, language, and sex on conversational distance. J Pers Soc Psychol 42:66–74

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Baldassare M, Feller S (1975) Cultural variations in personal space. Ethos 3:481–503

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. Ford JG, Graves JR (1977) Differences between Mexican-American and White children in interpersonal distance and social touching. Percept Mot Skills 45:779–785

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Sorokowska A, Sorokowski P, Hilpert P et al (2017) Preferred interpersonal distances: a global comparison. J Cross Cult Psychol 48:577–592

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Ruggiero G, Frassinetti F, Coello Y et al (2017) The effect of facial expressions on peripersonal and interpersonal spaces. Psychol Res 81:1232–1240

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Hayduk LA (1981) The shape of personal space: an experimental investigation. Can J Behav Sci 13:87–93

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Amaoka T, Laga H, Nakajima M (2009) Modeling the personal space of virtual agents for behavior simulation. In: 2009 international conference on CyberWorlds. IEEE, pp 364–370

    Google Scholar 

  17. Bailenson JN, Blascovich J, Beall AC et al (2003) Interpersonal distance in immersive virtual environments. Pers Soc Psychol Bull 29:819–833

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Iachini T, Coello Y, Frassinetti F et al (2016) Peripersonal and interpersonal space in virtual and real environments: effects of gender and age. J Environ Psychol 45:154–164

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to express our great appreciation to the financial support by the South China University of Technology under the grant No. D6192270.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Yu-Chi Lee .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2020 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this paper

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this paper

Yu, X., Lee, YC. (2020). Investigating the Comfort Distance of Chinese in Eight Directions. In: Long, S., Dhillon, B. (eds) Man–Machine–Environment System Engineering . MMESE 2019. Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering, vol 576. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-8779-1_53

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics