Proxemics and Territory

Proxemics is the name of the study that explains how people treat their space and other people in their proximity. It's a subcategory of our nonverbal communication.

While this may sound obvious or irrelevant, did you ever think about how you move around others? How far do you stand from someone else when talking with him\her? Or why did you choose a certain seat and not some other?

It's not a random decision or happenstance; people have a certain, deeply integrated, subtle code when it comes to personal space and territory. While you don't actually measure the exact distance you keep from others with a roller, you somehow just know it's the right distance.

Space Invasion

The bubble is a great metaphor to our personal space – we treat it as our "private air space" and we feel very vulnerable when someone intrudes it without invitation. Obviously, it's not the environmental hazards that we fear, but rather that awkward, annoying feeling when someone stands too close.

What Happens?

Extreme self awareness – suddenly we forget how to act 'naturally'

Limited movements and gestures

Reduced eye contact

Turning aside or away from the intruder

We'll usually immediately take a step back or step forward (depending on where they approach from).

Adopting a defensive position – folded arms, less smiles, frowning, tense posture.

Stopping the conversation entirely.

In short – space invasion puts us in a very uncomfortable and protective position. We can feel vulnerable and angry, or just wonder at the intentions of the invader.

All that occurs when this intimate space is invaded by unwelcome or unexpected company of course. People we love and feel intimate with are usually welcomed to our zone, and often are invited to enter it.

Why this Happens?

The complexity of personal space comes from the fact that its size is affected by many factors; some of them are very varied from person to person. These factors actually cause a social 'accident', when different people have a different concept about the 'right distance' to stand from each other. Some of these factors are:

The social situation: What type of social situation is this? Is it a cocktail party? Is it a staff meeting in the boardroom? A fishing trip with some friends? A public lecture?

In each of these situations you'll act and keep your space differently. Even if these are the exact same people.

For example – you'll probably keep a distance from your boss (probably the same one from the previous example) during work, but on a fishing trip together some of the social borders will fall down, and you'll feel more comfortable being in closer distance. However, when you'll get back to work again, you'll retain the appropriate work space between you.

The status of the people involved:

Your status has a huge effect on your personal space size and demand. First of all – like the alpha male of the pack, the higher your status the more space you consider to be yours. It's no surprise that the first class seats are bigger and have more space per individual.

Status also affects the size of the territory you require. Just Like the kings of old owned a huge palace – not because they needed 20 bedrooms and an Olympic swimming pool, but because it showed the measure of their power and influence. In modern days we have the equivalent mansions of the rich and famous to demonstrate their wealth and rich lifestyle.

When it comes to dominant – subordinate relationships it means that the high status person can invade the space of the lower status person without too much resistance, and sometimes he's even encouraged to do so.

Age:

It's most relevant when talking about children. Children are much more open and naïve in nature than adults – that's because they lack some of the 'social boundaries' that limit us as adults. Therefore – if a kid really likes you he'll run and hug you when he sees you, without too much worry about your readiness for such an "assault".

Our personal liking or disliking towards that specific person: a given.

The gender:

Women are more sociable than men: they get social cues better, more emotionally expressive and are generally better than us men when it comes to emotional communication. It's only natural then that women will feel more comfortable being closer to each other than men.

Men are more territorial and aggressive by nature and will keep more distance from other men, but when it comes to women we will usually prefer to get a little closer.

Culture:

The culture we grew up in has a tremendous affect on who we are as individuals, whether we like it or not. One of its direct influences is on the size of the individual personal space.

'Distant' cultures (northern Europe, US, and many other westerns cultures) tend to keep more personal space and use less touching than other more 'warm' cultures.

Other cultures including south Europe, Middle East and South American's are considered to be more 'warm' by nature – touch and close proximity are more welcome and socially accepted.

Note: Personality may also have a play in it. When it comes to personality, extrovert people naturally tend to keep less distance than introverts. It doesn't mean that's good, it means that extroverts will get along fine with other extroverts and probably annoy the introverts.

Territory

Humans have many similarities to animal's territorial behavior, only in a more sophisticated way.

It starts at the grand scale – countries, each with its own borders and armies to guard it. Then we can scale down to: regions, cites, streets, your neighborhood, your house, your room, your table and finally – your favorite mug!

How it's Expressed?

First of all, let's admit that there are several kinds of territories for humans. Let's examine the types as described by Irwin Altman – an American psychologist who made a lot of work in social and environmental psychology. The types are:

There is the primary type of territory – it's the kind of territory that really belongs to you – your home, your car, your private office, your spouse…

Secondary type of territory – it's the places and stuff you use often, but are not really 'yours' – your favorite seat in your local bar, your favorite spot in the park and so forth…

Public space – it's everybody's space! Well maybe except for suspicious strangers and terrorists.

Why make this distinction? Because it affects what we can do in each space and how would we react if it's invaded.

If I would enter your home uninvited and sit on your favorite couch – you'll feel quite alarmed and completely unsatisfied, you may even have the right to shoot me in some countries. But, if I would sit in 'your' place in your pub, you'll just swallow your ego and move to another spot. If it's a public space – you probably won't care much about seats as long as there's one.

Personalization

You can, however, tell a lot about a person by the way he treats and organize his space. Open (or careless) people will leave their environment visible and accessible to others. Organized and protective people will guard and arrange their things in a neat fashion, you instinctively avoid touching their stuff because you wouldn't want to mess it up.

Besides that, people put a lot of stuff to accustom their surroundings to their taste and to show others who they are: family photos, cat photos, toys, favorite posters, geeky gadgets, sexy wallpapers or neat clean desk all say something about the person who uses that space.

Seating Arrangements

Sometimes the answer is quite simple - you got a favorite seat or you just spotted someone you like and want to talk with, so you sit near him\her. But even then, why did you choose your favorite spot specifically 'there'? What if it's a new room full of strangers? What a about a class or a lecture room, will you choose the front row or position yourself as far as possible to the back?

I mentioned that we have a 'default' pattern when it comes to choosing a seat and it's especially true when talking about unfamiliar circumstances.

What happens is that most people choose their seat by a very predictable way: they will usually pick a seat that allows them to have a lot of personal space; but in the same time, they won't sit too far from other people, as if not to offend them by keeping too much distance.

Front Learning

Now let's talk a bit about classrooms, lecture rooms or any other setting that consists of a stage and an audience. From a listener in the audience point of view, there is a big difference in the attention, motivation and retention of the lecture, depending on his\her sitting position in the room.

I want to emphasize that this is a 2 way street – our choice of seat is derived from our feelings of involvement and motivation, and during the lecture our position in the audience in reverse affects these feelings.

When planning seating arrangements, the front rows are usually reserved for higher status persona and VIP concerned in the presented activity. It's the most exposed and "involved" row – so it's consists mostly of people who are truly concerned with the subject and\or the person who speaks or performs. E.g. the dedicated students in school.

The participants in the middle are also a very attentive and involved group. This group will usually participate the most due to the added sense of security surrounded by others.

Clearly, on the other side of the spectrum you can find the people who are either too shy or uninterested to be in the front or the middle – hiding in the back or to the sides. E.g. the "tired" students in school.

From my experience, I found out that people tend to fill the last and middle rows before they enter the front rows when they are not familiar with the lecturer or the place. The reasoning behind this is understandable – The first row feels an exposed and vulnerable position -people who sit behind you can watch you while you can't see them. When it's a familiar setting however, people feel more comfortable with the speaker and the subject so they will allow themselves to sit closer to feel more involved.

Tables- Power Plays

The Round Table

The most famous example for this table is the Round Table of King Arthur. Every knight who sat around the round table was considered equal to his peers in honor and title, and there was no central powerful position.

It's a great table for peaceful and cooperative discussions – everyone feels equally involved. It's also a great seating arrangement for brainstorming, because it encourages a free flow of ideas by everyone.

There is one tiny problem yet: while this table is the symbol of equality, if there is a higher status personality in the table (like King Arthur himself) he'll still be considered the source of influence in that scenario. It doesn't really matter where you sit if you wear a crown. His 'lieutenants', his most trusted and loyal, will sit right next to him - and therefore the next ones in line by "chain of command". On the opposite side of the table you'll find the opposition, naturally.

Rectangular Table

This is the traditional table – 2 short and 2 long ends. On the short ends of the table you'll find the most influential people. If it's a meeting between 2 rival camps –you will most likely find the leaders of each camp in opposite sides, with their supporters near them.

There is a general mood of competition and confrontation present in this type of table since most people will sit opposite to each other with the table as a barrier between them.

It's often very hard to achieve cooperation and team spirit in such setting, but it functions well in the business cooperative world, where one dominant individual (aka the boss) controls the flow of the meeting and everyone is looking up to him to make the final decisions.