Personal Space: Research

Psychological intimacy

A question of some relevance in seating behaviour is the psychological closeness of different arrangements. We asked groups of approximately 100 college students each in the United States, England, Holland, Sweeden, and Pakistan to rate a series of 37 arrangements of pairs seated at square, round, and rectangular tables along a scale from 'very intimate and psychologically close' to 'very distant and psychologically remote'. The rank orde of closeness was identical in all five countries. Side-by-side seating was always the most intimate, followed by corner seating, face-to-face seating, and various distant or catty-corner arrangements.

Distance and intimacy

Russo asked the students to rate diagrams of seating arrangements at a rectangular table (2-1-2-1). She found that increased distance produced ratings of less acquaintance, less friendliness, and lower talkativeness, except where increased eye contact counteracted the effects of increased distance. Even though the physical distance was greater between the two people at the head and foot of the table, there was more psychological closeness between them.

The limits of comfortable conversation

This study was based on the previous observation that people conversing prefer to sit across from one another, although at some slight angle, rather than side by side. However, it is obvious that this must be qualified by the size of the gap between the people. If two men are given the choice of conversing across from one another at a distance of 30 feet or sitting side by side on a sofa, they will select the sofa. This means that people will sit across from one another until the distance between them exceeds the limit for comfortable conversation. By noting the point at which people begin to sit side by side, we can learn the limits of comfortable converation under the particular conditions used. Two sofas in an attractively furnished lounge were placed at prearranged distances from one another before each session. Pairs of subjects were asked to enter the lounge and discuss various impersonal topics. The people sat on different sofa's - from three-and-one-half-feet and beyond, people sat side by side. It can be noted that, wich sofa's like these, people's heads are usually one foot behind the front of the sofa. Using the architect's concept of nose-to-nose distance, our subjects began to sit side by side when they were five-and-one-half feet apart. Under the particular conditions we used - two people who knew each other slightly discussing an impersonal topic in a large lounge - this can be considered the upper limit for comfortable conversation. The room scale is smaller in private homes, and there is some evidence that as room size becomes larger, people sit closer together. The same occurs when noise level and distraction increase.