Open Collections

UBC Theses and Dissertations

UBC Theses Logo

UBC Theses and Dissertations

Proxemics as an aspect of covert culture : an exploratory study of the spatial dimension of social interaction. Lind, Karin Marguerite 1968

Your browser doesn't seem to have a PDF viewer, please download the PDF to view this item.

Item Metadata

Download

Media
831-UBC_1968_A8 L54.pdf [ 4.43MB ]
Metadata
JSON: 831-1.0104519.json
JSON-LD: 831-1.0104519-ld.json
RDF/XML (Pretty): 831-1.0104519-rdf.xml
RDF/JSON: 831-1.0104519-rdf.json
Turtle: 831-1.0104519-turtle.txt
N-Triples: 831-1.0104519-rdf-ntriples.txt
Original Record: 831-1.0104519-source.json
Full Text
831-1.0104519-fulltext.txt
Citation
831-1.0104519.ris

Full Text

PROXEMICS AS AN ASPECT OF COVERT CULTURE - An Exploratory Study of the Spatial Dimension of Social Interaction  by KARIN MARGUERITE LIND B.A., University of B r i t i s h Columbia, 1965  A THESIS SUBMITTED Iii PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF  MASTER OF ARTS  in the Department of Anthropology and Sociology  We accept this thesis as conforming to the required standard  THE  UNIVERSITY OF BRITISH COLUMBIA June, 1968  In p r e s e n t i n g  for  that  this  an a d v a n c e d  the  Study.  thesis  thesis  degree at  Library shall  I further  for  Department  make  w i t h o u t my w r i t t e n  that  freely  may be g r a n t e d  for  permission.  of Columbia'  It  is  financial  of  British  available  permission for  thesis  The U n i v e r s i t y o f B r i t i s h V a n c o u v e r 8, Canada Date  it  o r b y h.i.is r e p r e s e n t a t i v e s .  this  fulfilment  the U n i v e r s i t y of  s c h o l a r l y purposes  or p u b l i c a t i o n of  Department  agree  in p a r t i a l  for  the  Columbia,  I agree  reference  and  extensive  by t h e  requirements  copying  this  Head o f my  understood  gain  of  shall  that  n o t be  copying  allowed  i  ABSTRACT The  a n a l y s i s o f man's use o f space and i t s s i g n i f i c a n c e  i n s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n has been l a r g e l y n e g l e c t e d by a n t h r o p o l o gists.  The t a s k f o r t h i s s t u d y i s t o i n d i c a t e t h a t the manage-  ment o f space i s f a r from a c c i d e n t a l - - i n f a c t , i t i s a complex network o f o b s e r v a b l e  patterns.  D e s p i t e the l a c k o f s t u d i e s  ( e m p i r i c a l o r o t h e r w i s e ) , i t i s argued t h a t i n f a c e - t o - f a c e i n t e r a c t i o n , s p a t i a l p a t t e r n s c o n s t i t u t e a fundamental dimension.  Moreover, such p a t t e r n s a r e n o t e x p l i c i t ; r a t h e r they a r e  i n the realm o f unconscious behaviour The  i . e . covert c u l t u r e .  t h e s i s b e g i n s w i t h a s u r v e y o f the few s t u d i e s r e -  p o r t e d i n the l i t e r a t u r e which d e a l w i t h s p a t i a l p a t t e r n s .  As  w e l l , c o n s i d e r a t i o n i s g i v e n t o a v a r i e t y o f m a t e r i a l which prov i d e s secondary r e f e r e n c e t o t h i s c e n t r a l i n t e r e s t . The w r i t e r t h e n r e p o r t s methods attempted t o g a t h e r i n f o r m a t i o n on codes o f s p a t i a l b e h a v i o u r .  Several d i f f e r e n t  per-  s p e c t i v e s f o r h a n d l i n g the r e s u l t a n t data a r e e x p l o r e d t o i l l u s t r a t e the relevance of distance patterns.  Following this  dis-  c u s s i o n i s a p r o p o s a l f o r a p o s s i b l e f i e l d s t u d y w h i c h would a l low a comprehensive a n a l y s i s o f human s p a t i a l arrangements.  ii  TABLE OF CONTENTS ABSTRACT  i  TABLE OF CONTENTS  i i  ACKNOWLEDGEMENT S  i i i  CHAPTERS: 1.  AN INTRODUCTION TO PROXEMICS  2.  PROXEMICS AND RELATED AREAS IN LITERATURE  1  Generalizations Covert Culture Social Interaction Proxemics  4 5 7 15  3.  COLLECTION OF DATA  25  4.  DATA PERSPECTIVES - SOME EXAMPLES  32  Proxemics According to H a l l General Features of Stagings Uneasy Verbal and Spatial Communication Social Boundaries  33 36 40 52  5.  6.  DISCUSSION OF METHODOLOGY AND THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK  53  POSSIBLE FIELD APPLICATION  70  BIBLIOGRAPHY  80  APPENDICES A.  Essay assignment  90  B.  Diagram of Stage Plan  91  C.  Summary of Data  92  iii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS  I wish to express my thanks to several persons i n particular who were a c t i v e l y involved i n the accumulation  of data connected with  the t h e s i s . Mr, Ken Waites, P r i n c i p a l of the school where the work was carried out, was an understanding  and enthusiastic friend--without h i s  approval and support the opportunity for the kind of research reported here would not have been a v a i l a b l e . An equal expression of appreciation i s extended to Peter Jaenicke, drama instructor, who permitted the writer to work with h i s students to the extent of allowing class periods for the actual project, supplying necessary stage equipment and labour force and valuable advice throughout the project. Students r e l i e d upon for t e c h n i c a l assistance included Terry Dopson, Brian Low and L u i g i M a z z i o t t i (sound); Brian Wolishyn ( l i g h t i n g ) ; Alan Say and John Gilson (photography).  Mr. H. Greer provided further  assistance regarding photography. Without the active imagination and enthusiasm of the students of the drama classes, the writer would have had a d i f f i c u l t and perhaps impossible task c o l l e c t i n g data. The help of Mr. Hal". Jones, Head of the English Department at the school, enabled the writer to conduct preliminary investigations of i n f o r mal s o c i a l rules., The o f f i c e s t a f f was h e l p f u l i n providing background material from school f i l e s and other assistance i n organizing concerned with the project.  schedules of persons  iv Mr. Doug Yip and Mrs. N. Lind kindly and e f f i c i e n t l y assisted with t e c h n i c a l i t i e s of stagings. To my thesis supervisors, Dr. C.S. Belshaw and Dr. Roy Turner, I am indebted for their patience and guidance i n the preparation of the thesis.  CHAPTER 1  AN INTRODUCTION TO PROXEMICS  Largely undefined and uncodified i s a whole range of s o c i a l 'habits' which anthropologists, and others, have only recently begun to describe systematically.  So often, the common experiences which we take  for granted are the most elusive of explanation and d e s c r i p t i o n  (Cherry,  1957). It i s intended i n t h i s thesis to take a look at r e g u l a r i t i e s i n human s p a t i a l patterns as one kind of s o c i a l behaviour.  Basic to such an  interest i s the assumption that, as Sapir (1929) among others points out, we follow c e r t a i n forms of behaviour i n spite of the fact that we may not be able t o describe them—a sub rosa s o c i a l contract. ature, often an accumulation  The available l i t e r -  of generalizations and vague impressions  of the  parameters of s o c i a l behaviour, f a r too frequently f a i l s to analyse the components of everyday behaviour.  Furthermore, i n the case of s p a t i a l behaviour  as an area of study i n i t s own r i g h t , the l i t e r a t u r e i s sparse. Interest i n the subject developed from reading the work of E.T. H a l l on proxemics^" and from personal observations and experiences.  What  would one f i n d out about distance patterns, p a r t i c u l a r l y between i n t e r acting persons?  It has been documented and observed i n animal studies, f o r  instance i n b i r d s , that s p a t i a l patterns and distances between individuals are f a r from randon; i n fact there i s often a f u n c t i o n a l explanation for such r e g u l a r i t i e s .  Human interaction and--specific to t h i s t h e s i s — t h e  1  2 s p a t i a l aspects of i t , have not yet been well documented. ...distance elements of a culture should...be studied with the same seriousness as the overt symbolic behavior of gesture and verbal and written language (Broom and Selznick, 1955).  3 FOOTNOTES 1.  "Observations and theories of man's use of space as a specialized elaboration of c u l t u r e " (1966:1).  CHAPTER 2  PROXEMICS AND RELATED AREAS OF LITERATURE  Data on proxemics are scattered i n many f i e l d s , and the writer intends i n t h i s chapter to indicate some of the varied l i t e r a t u r e  (and lack  of same) which led to the formulation and i n t e r p r e t a t i o n of an exploratory study of proxemics.  This w i l l take us into the following areas:  Anthro-  pology, Sociology, Psychology, Psychiatry, Zoology. It  i s to be c l e a r l y understood that t h i s leaves many areas of  relevance untouched^" but i t would be impossible to provide any degree of completeness within the confines of the t h e s i s . The chapter w i l l close with the work of E.T. H a l l who deals direct l y with proxemics.  His major publications (1959, 1966) served as the  impetus to the writer's interest i n s p a t i a l patterns and as the basis f o r a project to investigate distance phenomena.  Gener a1 iz ations  Many interesting but vague reports are given i n such f i e l d s as anthropology, sociology, psychology, psychiatry and ethnoscience  (to mention  only a few relevant areas) about the structuring of human behaviour. Remarks range from Garfinkel's (1963) complaint  that there i s r e a l l y  little  data about s o c i a l l y recognized f a m i l i a r scenes, a point repeated by Goffman-"...The study of ordinary human t r a f f i c and patterning of ordinary s o c i a l contacts has been l i t t l e considered"  (1963:2)—to sweeping  explanatory  generalizations about individuals acting and reacting to "prescribed patterns of conduct, practices and r i t u a l s which thereby guide and channel t h e i r a c t i v i t i e s and so give r i s e to the appearance of order, r e g u l a r i t y , almost  4  5  uniformity" (Frank, 1951:122). Sage warnings to get down to the business of observing and explaining what actually goes on are likewise given by Becker  (1956),who says  that there i s too l i t t l e work with 'uncaged' humans and that 'in the w i l d ' (that i s , non-lab.) studies or at least studies of natural s o c i a l groups (Lewin, 1951) should be the major focus f o r s o c i o l o g i s t s .  D'Andrade and  Romney (1964) point out that i n the case of ethnoscience (and the remark applies equally to our concern) the primary aim i s not to test theory but to describe s o c i a l (shared and learned) knowledge of peoples, a basic premise to t h i s being that human behaviour i s not random (Pittenger and Hockett, 1960). Anthropologists must deal with standardized patterns of behaviour as the most basic i s o l a t e s , according to Nadel (1951:75), fieldworkers i n anthropology usually considering as a major part of any ethnographic work the rules of s o c i a l behaviour of the people under study. Norms, r u l e s , conduct and r e g u l a r i t i e s are terms which appear i n discussions of the structuring of behaviour.  Berne (1963, 1964) adds two  more which go into everyday s i t u a t i o n s - - s o c i a l programming and semiritualistic  interchanges ( r i t u a l being defined as "stereotyped series of  simple complementary transactions programmed by external s o c i a l f o r c e s " — 1964:36).  Covert Culture It i s pointed out i n the l i t e r a t u r e that people do not always act  and react on the basis of e x p l i c i t r u l e s . Members of any single human community share l i t e r a l l y thousands of behaviour conventions which are as dominant as our rule of  6 keeping to the r i g h t , but which are much more subtle because they are learned, acted, responded to and taught almost e n t i r e l y out of awareness (Pittenger & Hockett, 1960:212). Paiesch and Kees (1961) likewise introduce t h e i r study with the point that people automatically apply rules of behaviour to s o c i a l situations, nonl o g i c a l or i m p l i c i t s o c i a l codes l i k e l y being as or more important than overt codes (such as etiquette and protocol) i n the regulation of interaction between people. Social rules operate whenever we are with others, a l l of us having a r e p e r t o i r e , so to speak, an i n t e r n a l organization below the conscious l e v e l , as language has grammar (Pike, 1954:110). Unknowingly we follow c e r t a i n forms of behaviour, which we may able to d e s c r i b e — " a n  not even be  elaborate code that i s written nowhere, known by  none, and understood by a l l " (Sapir, 1929:137).  The network of patterns 2  of which we are unaware or hardly aware i s c a l l e d covert culture  by  Kluckhohn (1943) . This i s what H a l l i s writing about when he says that culture controls behaviour i n deep and p e r s i s t i n g ways, many of which are outside of awareness and therefore beyond conscious control of the i n d i v i d u a l (1959:35). and most of culture l i e s hidden and outside voluntary control (1966:177). The problem i s to describe and analyse these informal rules and patterns.  built-in  As Hymes (1962) says of the ethnography of speaking,  the phenomena are there ready to be brought to order. Social Interaction  Uhai: phenomena 'to be ordered' have been studied and what, more  7 s p e c i f i c a l l y , give clues about s p a t i a l patterns? Many studies i n sociology point out that rules of behaviour, often not overt, are an important part of any s i t u a t i o n where two or more people are i n face-to-face contact.  Goffman (1959) describes an encounter  i n terms of 'sanctioned orderliness', face-to-face i n t e r a c t i o n having i t s own r e g u l a r i t i e s , processes Robert Bales  and s t r u c t u r e — a l i t t l e s o c i a l system (1956  (1949) t y p i f i e s small face-to-face groups as  s o c i a l systems of human i n t e r a c t i o n . A.L. Strauss remark about the e n c o u n t e r — i t  - a).  microscopic  (1959) echoes Goffman's  i s guided by r u l e s , norms and mandates,  although t h i s does not necessarily mean we can predict i t s outcome. A p a r t i c u l a r kind of i n t e r a c t i o n occurs i n the p s y c h i a t r i c setting.  What goes into a p s y c h i a t r i c interview i s a  question f o r both therapists and s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s .  multi-dimensional  The  interview i s  defined by S u l l i v a n (1954) as not only a process of i n t e r a c t i o n but a miniature of a l l communicative processes and containing within i t the e s s e n t i a l q u a l i t i e s of a l l human r e l a t i o n ships (1954:xvii). Berne t a l k s about games between therapist and patient while Pittenger, Hockett and Doneby (1960) give a 'microscopic analysis' of a few minutes of an interview between a p s y c h i a t r i s t and patient.  In the  psychiatric interview the therapist must be p a r t i c u l a r l y s k i l l e d i n communicative techniques.  These techniques were what the above  l i n g u i s t s and anthropologists—were  observers—  trying to i s o l a t e .  The significance of seating arrangements i n group psychotherapy has come i n f o r comment; Winnick and Holt (1961), for example, t a l k about the r e l a t i o n s h i p of psychological and physical space.  To study the effect  of seating and s p a t i a l arrangement of chairs the authors observed sessions  8 where patients either set up t h e i r own chairs or were confronted with d i f ferent kinds of seats, such as sofas, f o l d i n g , upholstered, or hard chairs, or seats at a t a b l e .  The authors' findings are too lengthy to present more  than a b r i e f example here. those who  If both f i x e d and folding chairs are present?  choose the portable seats are apparently more insecure.  It i s  questionable what 'insecure' means here, for even i n psychiatric jargon i t does not seem to refer consistently to a discrete state or c o l l e c t i o n of symptoms, but regardless of the looseness of the term i t seems quite clear i n the authors' report that most patients d i s l i k e d s i t t i n g on a sofa where there was  the l i k e l i h o o d of being touched, single chairs being preferred  as they provided a border for what Uinnick and Holt c a l l  'individual l i f e  space . 1  Outside the psychiatric setting? seating patterns i n groups have also been studied, by such people as Steinzor (1950), Bass and Klubeck (1952) and Sommer (1954, 1962,  1965,  1967)  and by sociologists such as  Hare and Bales (1963) . Most of the material deals with seating arrangements as they affect group dynamics, the basic premise being that ...seating arrangements i n a small face-to-face group help to determine the individuals with whom one i s l i k e l y to interact (Steinzor, 1950:552). One can add that the kind of i n t e r a c t i o n i s also affected. Theories and observations of Robert Sommer, psychologist, who among other things, studied interaction patterns i n a g e r i a t r i c s ward (195G), provide more direct information about the s p a t i a l dimension of social activity.  From observations of the ward, Sommer decided that  furniture arrangement was  a large contributing factor to the minimal i n t e r -  action and that by rearranging i t , s o c i a l contact among patients could be  9  increased.  Sommer further explored seating positions i n various groups  (1959, 1961) l a b e l l i n g h i s investigations group geography or ecology.  In  1965 he reported a study of small group ecology observations about student groups i n a c a f e t e r i a and a l i b r a r y , this time h i s interest being i n seating p o s i t i o n around a table.  Two recent studies of Sommer (1967 a and  b) continue h i s discussion but add l i t t l e new information t o his previous f indings . To return to the p s y c h i a t r i c setting, Reimer (1949) observed that i n the case of a disturbed patient he may want to be several feet from anyone nearby and that t h i s physical separation and i s o l a t i o n i s doubly 3  sought by an 'averted gaze'. and detachment.  With this t r a i t goes a low, subdued voice  Reimer reported on t h i s behaviour i n s i x patients which  makes one s k e p t i c a l about considering these p a r t i c u l a r observations anything more than interesting and supportative of other non-rigorous  studies.  Dealing with eye behaviour as related to distance patterns are relevant comments by Goffman.  For instance, the closer one i s to someone  whom one wishes to look at, the greater the compunction to avert one's gaze to decrease being exposed.  The further away one i s , the more licence  there i s to stare, although catching someone staring may cause embarrassment and shame as i f one has been caught i n an improper act (1959). Strangers  passing on a street may perform an interpersonal r i t u a l of d i r e c t l y  eyeing each other u n t i l they are about eight feet (this distance being labelled by H a l l as mandatory s o c i a l recognition distance) then immediately lowering eyes l i k e headlights being dimmed.  Yet i n other cases one i s  considered s h i f t y unless there i s direct eye contact, which r u l e can be skirted by such things as dark glasses or looking out of the corner of  10  one's eye.  And, according to H a l l (1966:67) who expresses a more general  r u l e , "American conversation prohibits staring at others" (1966:67). B i r d w h i s t e l l , an anthropologist, has spent many years codifying various everyday aspects of behaviour ranging from "the language of body motion" (Frum, 1966) to the American family dinner table r i t u a l  (1965:10),  courting behaviour, and posture differences between males and females (1964). He as well analyses the use of eye contact, head nod, and monosyllables such an 'nnn' (1962:10-13). Something  a l i t t l e different i s reported by E r i c Berne (1949)  who as a member of a psychiatric team having to judge the mental s t a b i l i t y of  10,000 s o l d i e r s , only 30 - 90 seconds a l l o t t e d to each man as he passed  through an assembly l i n e examination, t r i e d to delineate what i n a person's gaze gave one clues to that person's occupation i n c i v i l i a n l i f e .  Finding  that a greater than chance number of his hunches were correct, Berne t r i e d to  i s o l a t e the cues which were being transmitted--one was the person's gaze.  To take an example, according to the report, a farmer's face froze after a few seconds, expressionless, with slow s h i f t s of the eye, while a mechanic would look straight into the examiner's eye with c u r i o s i t y but without challenge.  (It i s d i f f i c u l t to understand what the last feature means or  indicates since Berne does not give discrete d e f i n i t i o n s . )  How r e l i a b l e  i s Berne's explanation of his i n t u i t i v e process i s a moot point but at least i t i s an attempt to explore how and what cues to behaviour are used in our assumptions and impressions of others. A comprehensive  study of eye behaviour has been made by Murphy  (1964) of the Tuareg who have an extremely elaborate code of behaviour b u i l t around eye behaviour and the upper part of the face.  Interaction i s main-  tained through aloofness and reserve and controlled by various maneuvers  11 with the v e i l worn by Tuareg men  (the v e i l i s a s o c i a l distance device  according to Murphy), there being highly formal and mandatory rules about the use of the v e i l with s o c i a l contact demanding several subtle adjustments of i t . In our society, according to Goffman (1961:75) a system of etiquette and reserve that members of every group employ i n s o c i a l intercourse would seem to function...as a veil. Having more direct implications f o r the study of s p a t i a l patterns are two other areas of human behaviour—crowding  and physical contact, and  housing  arrangements, the anthropological l i t e r a t u r e providing many references. For example, to consider physical closeness between persons, Mead, writing about Samoa (1939:44), reports that r e l a t i v e s of opposite sex have a most r i g i d code of etiquette prescribed for a l l their contacts with each other. After age ten or so opposite sexes cannot touch or s i t close (one wishes that Mead had indicated how  close this a c t u a l l y i s ) , nor can they eat,  work or dance together, nor use familiar address or be i n the same house. Quite the opposite occurs i n Tikopia ( F i r t h , 1936) where there i s no avoidance between, i n t h i s , case, brother and s i s t e r ; i n fact they eat,  s i t and sleep together.  For children, as i n Samoa,  body contact i s quite acceptable and children seek i t as an expression of the intimate and protective. Mead assumes that the reader knows what the terms intimate and protective mean, but, i n f a c t , they are annoyingly vague and suggest unrefined blinds f o r lack of rigorous description. Commenting on people other than Samoans, Mead (1939) mentions that for the Mundugumor of New Guinea, brothers must avoid each other and be formal when i n each other's presence, the only close contact not frowned  12  upon being a public f i g h t .  In Tikopia, r e f e r r i n g to F i r t h ' s study again,  i t i s taboo for a c h i l d to touch h i s father's body or head. Comparing and summarizing her f i e l d studies, Mead makes the point that attitudes towards physical intimacy vary enormously among individuals and have been very d i f f e r e n t l y standardized i n different societies (1939:300). In our society we can formulate rules about physical contact. For example, we are most suspicious and uneasy about any casual physical contact'between males.  Sleeping i n the same bed, or s i t t i n g on a man's  lap i n a car i s considered disgusting and repellant behaviour for a  man.  Another aspect of physical contact i s reported by Read (1965:48) in his f i e l d studies of New  Guinea where he describes how  in their street for s o c i a l contact. l i k e a beach. Or was  the Gahuku gather  R.ead found i t , to his d i s l i k e , crowded  However, although he f e l t i t was  crowded,  did the Gahuku?  i t rather a case of a Westerner with his patterns of non-physical  contact carrying his c u l t u r a l conditioning to another area where i t r e a l l y did not mean the same thing or apply at a l l ? Of course not only the anthropologists make reference to physical contact.  Even Lewis C a r r o l l has something to say about  it--  ...And she (the Duchess) squeezed herself up closer to A l i c e ' s side as she spoke. A l i c e did not much l i k e her keeping so close to her: first because the Duchess was very ugly; and secondly, because she was exactly the right height to rest her chin on A l i c e ' s shoulder, and i t was an uncomfortably sharp chin. However, she did not l i k e to be rude; so she bore i t as well as she could, (writer's emphasis) (1939:88). Weybrew (1963), studying human r e l a t i o n s on a modern atomic submarine which would submerge for two or three months at a time^reported that physical contact may  be a factor i n mental disturbances of crew members;  13 for example, many men  said they did not l i k e  bunk someone had just l e f t .  'hotbedding , climbing into a 1  This i s not even direct contact but, neverthe  less, the thermal presence of the man  vacating the bed was  disliked.  In the p s y c h i a t r i c s i t u a t i o n physical proximity, or the may  opposite  be used therapeutically, a p s y c h i a t r i s t soothing a withdrawn or f r i g h t  ened patient by s i t t i n g close to him or conversely, i n a group session, d e l i b e r a t e l y increasing the distance between disruptive participants (Horowitz, 1965),  Although space i s used by psycho-therapists  it is,  according to the same author, largely done i n t u i t i v e l y . Two  experiments i n v i o l a t i n g the norm of being too close to  another person indicate the importance of distance betxreen people. Garfinkel (1963) i n an experiment had students begin a conversation then bring t h e i r face very close to that of the other person.  and  Such a clos  distance i s not usual for casual f r i e n d l y encounters i n our society and Garfinkel reported that regardless of the sex, age or status of the i n d i v i dual, whether he was was  a f r i e n d or not, the students' aggressive  interpreted as sexual i n some way  being confused or angry.  proximity  and subjects reacted by moving away,  The fact that discomfort was  created indicates  that s p a t i a l boundaries had been overstepped. A similar experiment by F e l i p e and Sommer (1966), which they c a l l e d 'invasions of personal space', involved participant observation s i t t i n g uncomfortably close to another person. was  and  An;' underlying assumption  that under any set of conditions, a range of conversational distance... i s considered normal for that s i t u a t i o n (1966:207).  The r e s u l t s of the 'invasions' showed that getting too close can be disrup t i v e , the i n d i v i d u a l reacting i n various ways, from putting up actual  14 physical barriers to moving away or avoiding eye contact.  Sommer does not  report actual distances and, unfortunately, we do not even know how close 'close' i s . Anthropologists  (not to mention architects and i n t e r i o r  decorators  who are ignored i n the thesis not because they have nothing to say, but because space i s not unlimited) often have considerable to note about housing arrangements.  F i r t h , f o r one, as part of h i s ethnography of  Tikopia, noted the r e l a t i o n s h i p of s p a t i a l d i s t r i b u t i o n of houses and v i l l a g e s to kinship patterns. (1936:119).  S p a t i a l distance may indicate  s o c i a l distance as i n the case of a man who l i v e d about f i f t y yards from an o l d chief but whose younger brothers and s i s t e r s , l i v i n g even closer, reaped more benefits from the c h i e f , enough to create s o c i a l distance." t h i s i s banishment.  " i n Tikopia, micromovement may be ( F i r t h , 1936:186).  An i l l u s t r a t i o n of  Reporting on three particular cases of temporary ban-  ishment, F i r t h comments that half a mile seemedto be an acceptable  'away'  distance. The significance of distance patterns can be a trying question for F i r t h writes that in any c o r r e l a t i o n between physical distance and s o c i a l distance ...a society seems able to make i t s own r u l e s . For Tikopia the observer needs a magnifying glass as an a i d to interpretation (1959:187). Household geography i s another aspect of l i f e r e f l e c t i n g the structuring of space.  Looking again to F i r t h ' s study, we f i n d him noting  household arrangements and how they r e f l e c t s o c i a l organization. For instance, there are three general sections to a Tikopian house:  the central  area i s common ground for everyone; one side i s sacred and for ceremonials, only men being allowed to s i t on this side and people not turning their  15  backs to i t or their feet when sleeping; women and children occupy the other side. Further comments about the significance of house i n t e r i o r s are made by Piddington  (1950) who points out the fact that within a F i j i house  the upper end i s f o r higher status persons while the lower end i s for the more common v a r i e t y of people. Proxemics  Can we get closer to our central i n t e r e s t — s p e c i f i c and systemat i c study of physical distance patterns betx^een people?  Such studies are  infrequent i n the s o c i a l sciences but turning to the b i o l o g i c a l sciences, we f i n d many studies of s p a t i a l patterns  (such as t e r r i t o r i a l i t y , f l i g h t  and attack, and personal distance) among animals and b i r d s .  The l i t e r a t u r e  here being vast, and i n many cases beyond the technical competence of the writer, only a fragment of the material which a r t i c u l a t e s with human s p a t i a l behaviour w i l l be indicated.  A further reason for at least mentioning that  there i s a well-studied f i e l d , although i t be of non-human animals, i s because s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s o c c a s i o n a l l y — a n d i n the case of H a l l i n particul a r , frequently and profusely—make extensive and often over-generalized references to the findings of ethologists, zoologists and other b i o l o g i c a l scientists. Studies of birds, such as that done by Crook (1961) on the elaborate movements of flocks, indicate that spacing patterns are quite precise and are maintained by what Crook c a l l s s o c i a l mechanisms. impossible at the present humans.  It i s  state of research to make any such statements for  16  It has been observed and documented that d i f f e r e n t species of f l o c k birds have different average distances separating members of the f l o c k (a s p e c i e s - s p e c i f i c phenomena) and a l l have p a r t i c u l a r s p a t i a l zones for the i n d i v i d u a l , depending on the a c t i v i t y .  Individual distance,  that area around an individual within which the approach of a neighboring b i r d i s reacted to either with avoidance or attack (1961:139) i s quite exact.  Apparently, with finches anyway, there are, as w e l l ,  differences i n zones between males and females. Noted and c l a s s i c a l work on r e l a t i o n s to space of animals has been done by Hediger who explains i n Studies of the Psychology and Behavior of Captive Animals i n Zoos and Circuses two important animal:  f l i g h t and attack.  distances f o r a wild  The f l i g h t distance, c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of the  animal (and less for animals i n c a p t i v i t y than i n the w i l d ) , i s for some animals, such as the big cats, apparently so exact that i t can be measured in inches. H a l l , whose work on human s p a t i a l patterns served as a basis f o r the present study, several times uses Hediger's i l l u s t r a t i o n of f l i g h t / attack pattern u t i l i z e d by circus performers (1959, 1966, 1965) and although one can,without much straining of the imagination, f i n d comparable human adjustments, the writer i s suspicious that a one-to-one comparison between human and non-human animals i s s i m p l i s t i c and may be less than v a l i d , a compunction which H a l l does not share. To return to human s p a t i a l patterns, several a l l u s i o n s and oblique references to distance patterns, made by writers whose main interest i s non-proxemic, suggest p o s s i b i l i t i e s for empirical research.  For example,  the common sense remark of Paiesch and Kees (1961:32) that physical distance  17 is a clue to f r i e n d l i n e s s lends i t s e l f to concrete study.  Or a reference  to distance between Frenchmen made by Lerner whose observation that Frenchmen have "an elegant way  of maintaining proper distance between  i n d i v i d u a l s " (1961:428), suggests research p o s s i b i l i t i e s — w h a t would we f i n d i f we  looked at actual distances rather than just the s o c i a l aspect  of 11 faut garder ses distances'?  Garfinkel's experiment i n v i o l a t i n g  the norm of proximity with people (reported previously) gives one another idea for quantifying distance and finding out what i t means. In psychiatry we f i n d studies which d e l i b e r a t e l y have a s p a t i a l focus, f o r instance, dealing with the question of whether schizophrenics have different s p a t i a l patterns from mentally normal persons.  Everyday  observations i n the c l i n i c a l setting indicate that schizophrenics require more space around them than the average person.  In face-to-face encounters  a schizophrenic cannot tolerate the distance a normal person can which, H a l l says, i s because the schizophrenic f l i g h t distance is greater.  In  a state of panic or stress, a schizophrenic may want a vast amount of space and some psychotherapeutic  situations are f i n a l l y allowing him to have i t  by, for instance, moving him into larger and larger rooms u n t i l he no longer f e e l s that the world i s closing i n on  him.  Experiments were done by Horowitz, Duff and Gtratton (1964) to find out about personal space (defined simply by them as the area immediate surrounding  the individual) of normal persons and schizophrenics,  hypotheses being tested and confirmed:  two  1. People use a certain predictable  and regular distance between themselves and other persons or objects. 2. Schizophrenics require greater distances. The Horowitz experiments involved four s e t t i n g s .  In the f i r s t  16 experiment, 19 schizophrenics and 19 e n l i s t e d men similar i n rank, age and c u l t u r a l background were t o l d they were part of a study on equilibrium. Subjects were asked to approach a hat rack or another male and when the individual stopped, the distance between his toes and the base of the rack or the feet of the other person were measured by counting the nine-inch square t i l e s on the f l o o r separating them.  Results showed that both  schizophrenics and non-schizophrenics stopped closer to the object than the  person. The second experiment tested several different approach distances  to a hat rack, a man and a woman, by ten female schizophrenics and ten normal female volunteers. Subjects this time walked frontwards, backwards, side-ways and at an angle towards the object or person.  Results again  indicated that both groups approached closest to the hat rack. Taking the distances from different approaches, a s p a t i a l zone was estimated f o r each individual and c a l l e d the body-buffer zone. ing  Study-  diagrams f o r approaches to the hat-rack, man or woman, i t was found  that schizophrenics had the largest s p a t i a l zone when approaching persons of either sex. In the next experiment ten male subjects were t o l d about the r e a l interest of the assignment  (namely, responses to space) and asked to  approach, again i n eight different ways, a man or woman to the point where subjects began to f e e l uncomfortable.  Graphs made of responses showed  greater distance between males than between a female and a male. As a f i n a l v a r i a t i o n , 25 schizophrenics and the same number of normal persons were asked to draw lines around a silhouetted male figure seen from above, f r o n t a l l y and i n p r o f i l e , mimeographed on separate sheets  19 of paper.  Subjects were to zone the distance they liked to keep between  themselves and others i n ordinary conversation.  It was found that schizo-  phrenics drew larger zones around the f i g u r e . Although the authors mention that the s p a t i a l zone depends on the s i t u a t i o n and state of the i n d i v i d u a l , they did not seem to take t h i s into consideration i n t h e i r experiments.  Further, perhaps quite d i f f e r e n t results  would have been found i f , f o r instance, subjects were t o l d to approach a f r i e n d or stranger. Argyle and Dean (1965), studying eye contact as an important of communication, give  another clue to the s p a t i a l dimension of  part  behaviour.  From the premise that eye contact and physical proximity must be i n e q u i l i brium for a comfortable  s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n they tested and concluded  the closer two subjects are together the less the eye contact. tionship between eye contact and distance was subjects having a conversation two,  rela-  tested by placing seated  s i x and ten feet apart, one  pant i n the conversation being a confederate  The  that  partici-  of the experimenter and gazing  continuously at the subject whose eye contact v/as measured for three minutes. The experiment confirmed the hypothesis that eye contact decreases with proximity and increases as distance increases.  Moreover, there i s less  eye contact with mixed pairs than same sex ones and this i s most marked at the close (two feet) distance where subjects often appeared anxious and made various nervous gestures. was  At ten feet the distance for conversation  too great as indicated by subjects leaning forward.  The  increased  eye contact that occurs at t h i s distance i s needed to give signals that one i s s t i l l  'with' the s i t u a t i o n .  As H a l l says (1966:115)  ...to f a i l to hold the other person's eye i s to shut him out  20 and bring conversation to a h a l t , which i s why people who are conversing at this distance can be observed craning their necks... In a study of comfortable conversation, Sommer (1961) after several experiments with different people s i t t i n g on two couches opposite each other, concluded that people as a rule s i t across from one another u n t i l the distance between them exceeds the limit of comfortable t i o n and then they s i t side by s i d e .  conversa-  The c r u c i a l distance i s f i v e and a  3  half feet  for seated pairs--further than t h i s conversation i s a s t r a i n ,  and a move i s made so that participants are side by side.  This finding  supports results from another experiment Sommer conducted where i t was noted that around a table, chairs at sides and ends, i f there was a leader present chairs seven feet away from him were r a r e l y occupied.  In a study which  involved observation of students i n a reference room at a University l i b r a r y , Sommer (1967) remarks that the distance of four feet across the tables d i s couragedconversation  and, for support, refers to Hall's assertion that  t y p i c a l personal conversation i n our society takes place at a closer d i s tance.  As a further study (1962) of t y p i c a l distances for conversation  Sommer adds to h i s data by conducting experiments with portable chairs instead of sofas so he can also consider side by side distance. What happens when t h i s distance, as w e l l as the face-to-face distance, i s increased?  Results are complicated, as Sommer has twenty-five d i f f e r e n t combina-  tions of side and opposite distances.  For example, when side distance i s  two feet, people do not s i t side by side u n t i l the face-to-face distance i s four or more f e e t .  When the side distance i s increased to three or four  feet people do not u t i l i z e i t u n t i l the distance across i s f i v e f e e t .  Such  a variety of results gives us a clue to the complexities of s p a t i a l patterns, such as the surroundings  influencing seating distances.  In a private home  21  i t i s not unusual to f i n d furniture s i x , seven or more feet apart, yet conversation can s t i l l be carried on.  Obviously, there are a tremendous  number of variables to consider. Dealing with human s p a t i a l patterns as a central focus, i s the work of H a l l whose studies of proxemics served as the impetus f o r the writer's investigations.  H a l l , concerned with the fact that we take our culture for  granted (Hall, Whyte and Foote, 1966) accumulated  an interesting and wide  range of material on various aspects of what we have e a r l i e r c a l l e d covert culture and, more s p e c i f i c a l l y , r e g u l a r i t i e s of human handling of space. From a single chapter i n his f i r s t major publication, The Silent Language (1959) the topic of man's structuring of microspace expanded to a book and acquired the dramatic name of The Hidden Dimension. A basic premise that underlies Hall's work i s that culture i s a mold i n which we are a l l cast and i t controls our d a i l y l i f e i n many unsuspecting way (1959:38). One of these ways concerns our experience with the organization of space. Man carries around with him a series of s p a t i a l spheres, l i k e bubbles, i n which various categories of transactions are permitted to occur...these hidden zones e l l i c i t i n g different responses as boundaries are crossed (1961), There are four zones, as formulated by H a l l :  Intimate, Personal, Social  and Public, which can be arranged i n the following scheme, Hall's cuts being made on the basis of thermal, olfactory, kinesthetic and v i s u a l factors.  intimate  Personal  22  A good portion of Hall's material deals with c u l t u r a l differences i n behaviour; the Arabs, Latin and North Americans, Japanese  (1959),  Germans, English and French (1966) i n particular being subject to comparison, but such material w i l l be by-passed here not because i t lacks interest but because i t i s extraneous to the focus of the present study.  Likewise,  a c r i t i q u e of some of Hall's statements i s l e f t f o r a later chapter (5) after a discussion of methodology and problems with h i s material, when i t becomes apparent that h i s theories and vocabulary are often confusing. Relying on Hall's material, Brown (1965) i n a popular psychology text devotes a section to s p a t i a l relations of man, and suggests that psychologists could usefully consider 'Hallian' hypotheses i n their studies. Brown points out, f o r instance, that a basic r e q u i s i t e f o r interaction i s proximity, strangers who do not want to interact trying to maintain distance from each other, such as s i t t i n g several or at least alternate seats apart, or not choosing adjacent telephone booths i f possible.  For strangers,  back-to-back or side-to-side closeness and contact i s more bearable than face-to-face because i n the former two, one can avoid v i s u a l contact. Once eye contact i s made i t i s d i f f i c u l t not to either have some kind of interaction, or to f e e l g u i l t y i f one avoids i t . A test of one of Hall's hypotheses of how people related physic a l l y to others i n interaction, s p e c i f i c a l l y differences between Americans and Arabs and how they structure t h e i r microspace, was conducted by Watson and Graves (1966) whose aim was to test the v a l i d i t y of Hall's impressions on American-Arab  differences and to record data empirically (which H a l l  did not do) using his system of notation.  A simple hypothesis was to be  tested—Americans have different proxemic behaviour to Arabs, the l a t t e r  23 being more close and direct to each other.  From 32 students who were either  Arabic or American, groups of two of the same n a t i o n a l i t y were placed i n an observation room to have a conversation.  Observation periods of f i v e min-  utes by the authors (and a second observer as a check on r e l i a b i l i t y ) involved notations of proxemic behaviour by the minute.  After individual  scores were recorded, a group mean.-: calculated,and s t a t i s t i c a l analysis applied? i t v/as found that the hypothesis was v a l i d . direct i n t a l k i n g , sat closer to each other, another  The Arabs were more  were more l i k e l y to touch one  (Americans never had physical contact), looked at each other more  d i r e c t l y and talked more loudly than their American counterparts.  The  Arabs began talking as soon as they entered the room and did not stop u n t i l the observer enteredpwhile American pairs were more restrained, although not to the point of f a i l i n g to carry on a conversation at a l l . experiment,  From the  the authors had several suggestions to make, the f i r s t being  that improved methods of recording data and larger samples are needed. expand this to suggest that p r e l i t e r a t e proxemics  They  cultures should be studied for  and ask the question of whether there are changes i n proxemic  behaviour as people are exposed to different patterns and to acculturation. Is there a s p e c i f i c series of patterns for i n d u s t r i a l society?  No one has  r e a l l y analysed the dynamics of contact between two interactors who have d i f f e r e n t proxemic patterns.  If we accept the fact of c u l t u r a l differences  i n this aspect of behaviour, are differences within culture related to personality?  A l l these questions lead the authors to conclude that hope-  f u l l y we w i l l soon have a f i e l d of psychoproxemics, and t i e together more research.  which w i l l encourage  24  FOOTNOTES  1.  Such as m i l i t a r y regulations about distance, sports, conversation, comparison of professional distance (how s o c i a l distance i s related to actual distance), games of physical contact, h i s t r i o n i c s , a r t , etiquette books (covered elsewhere), f i c t i o n w r i t i n g .  2.  For the purposes of t h i s paper the reader i s referred to the following d e f i n i t i o n of culture: "... as I see i t , a society's culture consists of whatever i t i s one has to know or believe i n order to operate i n a manner acceptable to i t s members, and do so i n any r o l e they accept for any one of themselves ... .Culture i s not a material phenomenon; i t does not consist of things, people, behaviour or emotions. It i s rather an organizat i o n of these things....The things people say and do, their s o c i a l arrangements and events, are products or by-products of their culture ..." (Goodenough, 1964:36).  3.  The distance of 5%-8 feet i s what H a l l suggests i s t y p i c a l for impersonal business conversation between people who do not know each other w e l l . If t h i s i s so, i t suggests that Sommer's subjects 'should' have been much closer for f r i e n d l y conversation.  4.  This suggestion w i l l be taken up i n the f i n a l chapter of the thesis as the writer t r i e s to outline a hypothetical study of t h i s nature.  CHAPTER 3 COLLECTION OF DATA  Having argued that s p a t i a l patterns do e x i s t , and that they are an i n t e g r a l aspect of general s o c i a l behaviour, t h i s chapter w i l l outline the approaches taken by the writer to explore proxemic questions. ing,  Follow-  chapter 4 w i l l discuss the data. As a brief note of explanation regarding methods, the writer's  conception of the f i e l d of investigation narrowed considerably as early e f f o r t s proved to y i e l d extremely nebulous and unwieldy data.  As chapter  2 proceeded from general statements about informal/covert culture and behaviour to more direct and relevant material regarding proxemics, so did the writer's methods of data c o l l e c t i o n . The f i r s t aim was to f i n d a useful means of tapping less than conscious behaviour and finding out i f , and i f so how, people a r t i c u l a t e d informal rules of s o c i a l behaviour, including those having to do with s p a t i a l arrangements. An essay topic (Appendix A) was given to Grade 11 and 12 students of English at a Vancouver high school, the intention being to provide minimally defined s o c i a l situations as cues to which students would write about behaviour r u l e s .  This was s t r i c t l y an exploratory endeavour to ascertain  what, i f anything, would be a r t i c u l a t e d about less-than-formal r u l e s . On the basis of responses to the essay topics and i n a further attempt to explore methods for tapping informants' awareness of proxemic patterns, four questions were included i n a large scale questionnaire being  25  26  administered to the t o t a l population of the school, close to two thousand students.  While the major portion of the questionnaire was  collecting  straight-forward information about students, adolescent sub-culture and occupational orientations, the writer's questions, l i s t e d below, included a concern with embarrasing situations and physical 1.  contact.  In which of the following situations would you be most embarrassed, assuming you would be embarrassed at a l l : (check only one) Alone with f r i e n d of same sex Alone with friend of opposite sex Casual s i t u a t i o n Social s i t u a t i o n Public s i t u a t i o n  2.  To be at ease one must follow and believe i n the rules of conduct Agree Disagree  3.  4.  Crowded buses bother  me:  A lot Come A little Hot at a l l ___ How would you react to an embarrassing s i t u a t i o n i f you were with a group of people your own age? (Check only one) Joke or laught i t off Leave Blush, get f l u s t e r e d or blow up Ignore i t Other (Specify) Questions  1 and 4 grew out of the essay topic, the categories used  in 1 following Hall's d i v i s i o n of a s p a t i a l continuum f o r various s i t u a t i o n s . The items i n question 4 included the most frequently mentioned reactions in the essay topic, patterned and grouped i n Goffmanesque d i a l e c t ; s p e c i f i c a l l y , escape,  flooding out and c i v i l  from Goffman (1961:31), was  inattention. Question 2, a quote  simply to f i n d out the general reaction to such  27 a remark about behaviour being governed by r u l e s . It i s no doubt apparent to the reader, and i t was to the writer at the reported stage of exploration, that the two approaches, as they were carried out, were inadequate to c o l l e c t the kind of material needed for a study of s p a t i a l patterns. A brief acquaintance with psychological tests suggested to the writer that i f a semi-projective instrument could be devised, responses to such may get at unconscious ordering of the s p a t i a l dimension of behaviour. Following Henry (1956), underlying phenomena such as learned patterns of s o c i a l behaviour are tapped by instruments l i k e TAT''". For the writer's purposes, a series of pictures composed of units of varying distances i n terms of dichotomies such as comfortable/uncomfortable, friendly/unfriendly, easy/uneasy were prepared, the intention being to correlate responses with a pre-arranged distance scale.  However, the construction of a suitable  instrument taking f a r too much time and psychological sophistication, i t was decided that unless the invention of a test was to be the major purpose of the thesis, i t was not economical to pursue the e f f o r t . The fourth method of accumulating data involved information from popular etiquette manuals to f i n d out i f and how distance patterns were outlined f o r interacting persons, following an assertion by H a l l that i n any society the code of manners (and presumably etiquette manuals constitute an a r t i c u l a t e d code) sums up the culture.  Appendix C includes a note i n d i -  cating the kind of material one does f i n d i n etiquette primers but, as w i l l be seen, the writer was no closer than e a r l i e r e f f o r t s to studying proxemics per se. Consequently, the problem was s t i l l to f i n d a means of c o l l e c t i n g  28 the uncodified but common rules which contribute to the s o c i a l machinery of interaction, p a r t i c u l a r l y what occurs s p a t i a l l y and what this means. To t h i s end i t was decided, a f t e r considerable preparation, to u t i l i z e drama classes at the same Vancouver high school which had been subjected to the questionnaire and other data c o l l e c t i o n devices at the hands of the xrciter and a team of researchers. From December 1966 to A p r i l 1967 the writer attended senior drama classes and began planning a project i n which these students, 12 boys and 25 g i r l s , would act out impromptu s o c i a l situations providing, even i f only secondarily, information about the use of space.  Every e f f o r t was  made to f i t the project into the framework of the drama i n s t r u c t i o n . Fortunately, the emphasis i n the class i n s t r u c t i o n on improvisation had made students quite at home with spur-of-the-moment acting and the project was geared to this since i t was to the investigator's advantage to have scenes as open and spontaneous as possible to minimize artificiality of behaviour. The project was limited to a series of four general situations which students would act out on a g r i d marked on a stage.  For details of  the physical plan of the project the reader i s referred to Appendix B. Four situations to be acted out by students were selected to represent the four s p a t i a l areas of Hall's continuum.  The Family Quarrel  represents the Intimate category, Gossiping among friends the Personal, an interview Social-Consultive, and a lecture or address to be Public.  It i s  c e r t a i n l y open to question whether these r e a l l y do represent Hall's slots since h i s labels are hardly d e f i n i t i v e , a c r i t i c i s m which w i l l be elaborated in chapter 5.  Under the circumstances,  i t was decided that, as a minimum  factor of agreement, both H a l l and the investigator shared i n North American culture and that i f he assumed the reader would i n t u i t i v e l y or otherwise know what he meant, perhaps the investigator could do no more than accept his  f a i t h i n the i n t u i t i v e process.  At least, four different situations  2 for  stagings  information.  had been selected which should y i e l d different kinds of Moreover, the situations seemed interesting, to both students  and observer. Students were t o l d at the beginning of each class what the ' s i t uation f o r the day was and had a few minutes to get into groups of tv/o or 1  three(the number of actors per staging decided upon both a r b i t r a r i l y and because of limitations of space and recording) to plan their  scene.  It was decided to use the stage of the school auditorium for stagings since students were accustomed to working there. the stage, the dimensions  A g r i d was marked on  of which allowed room to cover Hall's distance  continuum and yet not crowd the stage; as w e l l the g r i d had to be of such a size as to covered by a camera.  Recording sheets which duplicated the  stage g r i d at scale 1"= 2' were mimeographed, the intention being to mark every move made by an actor, and every s p a t i a l arrangement, on the g r i d on a corresponding sheet. It was decided to have the dialogue of stagings taken on tape, both to a s s i s t the observer in reconstructing scenes and to provide a continuous record of staging a c t i v i t y .  Camera and dialogue were coordinated  by having pictures taken on signal of a b e l l which v/as picked up on the tape recorder.  Largely a r b i t r a r i l y , i t v/as decided to have pictures taken  of the f i r s t position of the actors and the following two moves made by any of the performers.  The number v/as increased to f i v e part way through the  30 project since i t was  found that t h i s would cover the t o t a l number of-  moves as a r u l e . There was  a question of time to be considered—since  of classes to be used for the writer's project was to be b r i e f i f a s u f f i c i e n t body of data was  the number  limited, stagings  had  to be accumulated each day.  Exercises done previously by the class usually took no more than f i v e minutes each, often only one or two minutes, so i t was  decided to instruct  them to keep t h e i r scene shorter than f i v e minutes.  Following  such a sche-  dule i t would be possible to go through at least eight stagings per s i x t y minute period, leaving ample room for interruptions. After the series of stagings had been completed,the writer spent a class period discussing with students the stagings, and proxemics i n a general fashion, before describing to the class the dynamics of the project. Comments from that meeting support the claim of the writer that students were not aware of the distance aspect of the assignment, nor, more s p e c i f i -  3 c a l l y , the reasons for the g r i d .  The discussion with the drama students  focussed on v e r b a l i z a t i o n about rules of behaviour that they had used i n the stagings.  The framework for asking about codes of behaviour depends on  the basic theme of the t h e s i s — n o t only were the drama students drawing on c e r t a i n c u l t u r a l and s o c i a l patterns but the observer, as part of the same culture, was students.  using the same framework to interpret the actions of the  Following  Schutz' argument (1564:15), u n t i l i t i s proved other-  wise, one can assume that the meaning f o r the actors corresponds to the meaning their a c t i v i t y has f o r , i n this case, the investigator.  31  FOOTNOTES  1.  "There i s no other way f o r the individual to convey his feelings except i n the ways i n which he has been taught to communicate with others: i n the public symbols whose core of meanings i s generally understandable....He starts on the basis of the pattern of meaning and a f f e c t which his past c u l t u r a l training has taught him should characterize (such) human situations (Henry, 1956:11). TAT story i s a " C r y s t a l l i z e d symbolic projection of the individual's e f f o r t s to formulate major f e e l i n g s , . . i n the framework of the manner in which he has previously learned to present himself to the outer world" (Henry, 1956:40).  2.  Please note that throughout the thesis 'staging' i s to be taken to mean each s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n played out by students. In other words, an 'event' as defined by Chappie (1940)--"beginning to end of observed interaction". To r e f e r to a l l those stagings which make up one of the four particular assignments, 'grouping' w i l l be used, or 'category', which refers to one of the four s p a t i a l d i v i s i o n s : Intimate, Personal, Social or Public.  3.  They had accepted the i n i t i a l explanation that i t was for photographic purposes which would later be used i n a class study of blocking.  CHAPTER 4  DATA PERSPECTIVES - SOME EXAMPLES  Now knowing how proxemic material from stagings was c o l l e c t e d and how non-spatial material was added to the body of data, i t i s intended to u t i l i z e several perspectives, separately, to get at the dynamics and process of stagings. F i r s t , a brief section summarizing s p a t i a l data i n terms of Hall's t h e o r e t i c a l framework.  One could e a s i l y present a thorough H a l l i a n analysis,  taking many pages, but i t was the writer's opinion (after i n i t i a l study of the data) that Hall's approach, and p a r t i c u l a r l y his ' r i g i d ' s p a t i a l continuum, was r e s t r i c t i v e .  Since i t was not intended to turn the chapter  into an i l l u s t r a t i o n of pre-formulated  generalizations, i t seemed pedantic  to match H a l l i a n rules with examples from stagings. Dispensing with the summary of s p a t i a l variations of the four groups of stagings, which represented  (hypothetically, at least) Hall's  distance continuum, a general section follows i n an attempt to indicate some of the variables involved i n the s p a t i a l arrangements of stagings. In addition, a comparison of the different groups of stagings i s included to provide some continuity, i n the form of shared features, of variables which affect or r e f l e c t distance patterns. Section 3 takes quite a different approach to the data, from the perspective of pattern becoming obvious often only when i t i s disrupted. Both verbal and non-verbal behaviour are analysed for instances of breaks or lack of ease i n communication. This d i r e c t i o n , followed to get at  32  33 implicit rule behaviour, i t must be admitted, diverted the writer from a s t r i c t consideration of the proxemic dimension of stagings.  However,  s p a t i a l patterns do not occur i n i s o l a t i o n , which seems a legitimate reason to turn to the major focus of stagings which was  usually verbal.  The a p p l i c a t i o n of one kind of model dealing with the structuring of s o c i a l i n t e r a c t i o n closes the chapter.  The section v/as included to,  b r i e f l y , provide an i n d i c a t i o n of (a) the importance of s o c i a l boundaries to any i n t e r a c t i o n , including stagings, (b) the f l e x i b i l i t y of staging data in 'responding' to various perspectives, (c) the framework for distance patterns which are one fundamental element of the stagings. Chapter 4 w i l l be followed by a discussion of problems with the staging project and the t h e o r e t i c a l models of H a l l , before leaving the staging material to suggest a possible proxemic study of a community. Proxemics According  to H a l l  Does the data from staging support Hall's distance continuum? Compare the boundaries of Hall's categories to material from stagings of situations x/hich x/ere selected to represent his four discrete slots  (and  i t i s argued further that such slots are far from d i s c r e t e ) . According  to  H a l l , to quickly review the outline of his work i n chapter 2, North Americans divide the space between themselves and another person, i n face-to-face contact, into four major zones. Hall's minimal distance unit, labelled Intimate, by stagings of a family quarrel. any staging at 1% feet or l e s s .  i s not  represented  In f a c t , very l i t t l e action occured i n As a r u l e , three to four feet was  the  usual distance during quarrel scenes, distance varying considerably from  34 six  or seven feet, when one member of the group would wander, to body con-  tact when there would be a s c u f f l e , a slap or awkward intimacy.  A genera-  l i z a t i o n that most i n t e r a c t i o n i n this p a r t i c u l a r set of stagings occurs at  distances of three to four feet says l i t t l e alone and must be  within the context  considered  of the s i t u a t i o n . Moreover, from comments by students  in discussion a f t e r the project, the family quarrel i s not necessarily seen as Intimate although to the investigator at least, and supported by observation such as F i r t h ' s , that "The household is a compact l i t t l e group with i t s own  intimate l i f e " (1936:87), a s i t u a t i o n within the  would be c l a s s i f i e d as  ' i n ' family group  Intimate.  H a l l states that people u t i l i s e a personal space (and  personal  suggests at least the p o s s i b i l i t y of intimacy), meaning keeping one and a half to four feet from the front of another person i n casual s i t u a t i o n s . Since we do not know what H a l l does and does not consider personal except from his copied d e f i n i t i o n from biology, i t seems no less r e l i a b l e to consider the choice of gossiping between friends as personal. 'friend' was was  The s t i p u l a t i o n  included and s p e c i f i e d i n instructions to the students, as i t  f e l t that the stranger/friend continuum was  c e r t a i n l y not a new  idea.  important to the s i t u a t i o n ,  For example, consider Free and Vanderbilt  as they specify d i f f e r e n t codes for strangers and friends according etiquette. for  (1956) to  As w e l l as a stranger/friend dimension others can be applied;  example private/public, and  informal/formal.  As a r u l e , students gossiping used distances of two and a half feet to four f e e t .  For this category of stagings and for the family quarrel  there was  far more movement than i n the following two set of scenes, namely  Interview  and Public s i t u a t i o n . This suggests that as people move from the  35  the informal/private to formal/public they are more r e s t r a i n e d i n their movement.  Perhaps the d e f i n i t i o n of the s i t u a t i o n i s more r i g i d as there are  e x p l i c i t rules about behaviour The Interview was  i n such s i t u a t i o n s .  selected to represent Hall's Social-consultive  category, more s p e c i f i c a l l y the Consultive end of the category.  Two  of interviews x^ere acted out by students—business and counselling.  kinds (A  small group of four stagings of t e l e v i s i o n interviews were not considered i n t h i s category.) In the Interview, chairs were more frequently used than i n the previous two sets of stagings (students having choice as to whether or not they wished to use furniture with the general request from the observer that i f at a l l possible they would do without).  Again there seems to be  a s h i f t from freedom i n motion, as occured i n the family quarrel and gossiping to being  'held i n place' by f u r n i t u r e .  Students acting out job interviews (as a l l but one of the business interviews were) did not s i t seven, eight and nine feet apart, which, according to H a l l , i s the most distance (and usual) end for impersonal business between persons who  do not know each other well, and the usual  distance between chairs of a businessman a,nd his v i s i t o r i n the o f f i c e . Rather, a closer distance was used by students, four to s i x feet, which f a l l s within Hall's lower boundary of 5% f e e t * . In the counselling session, distance r a r e l y exceeded four feet, whether persons were standing or s i t t i n g . In the Public group of stagings, with one exception, students used greater space between speaker and representative audience of two or three persons, seven to nine feet being the distance.  It was as i f even the term  36  Public indicated a need for greater space.  It i s worthwhile pausing to  state the obvious implication that the students used these distances to convey the s o c i a l focus.  They could have used other means, such as f u r n i -  ture barricades, tone of voice, etc., but instead did, i n f a c t , u t i l i z e distance as a c h a r a c t e r i s t i c cue of the s i t u a t i o n .  General Features of Stagings H a l l devotes a considerable part of h i s writing to links between e t h n i c i t y and s p a t i a l patterns used i n interaction (1955, 1959, 1962, 1966). It was o r i g i n a l l y planned i n the thesis to consider the e t h n i c i t y of p a r t i cipants i n the stagings, following Hall's claim that c e r t a i n patterns c h a r a c t e r i s t i c of p a r t i c u l a r ethnic groups persist even to the t h i r d and fourth generation.  The number of students i n the drama class  taking part i n the project who were of non-Canadian c i t i z e n s h i p or b i r t h proved to be few.  However, just i n case these individuals were using  patterns that were noticeably d i f f e r e n t from their s p a t i a l p r o f i l e s were compiled and checked.  'Anglo-Saxon' classmates,  Ho p a r t i c u l a r s i m i l a r i t i e s  among students of the same ethnic background were apparent, and there were no discernable differences i n distance patterns from students not born i n Canada. This was not the major reason for abandoning the consideration of e t h n i c i t y , however; rather, f a r more interesting, and what seemed to be more useful material, could be derived from the data i f they did not have to be interpreted i n such narrow terms. There are differences i n s p a t i a l patterns regarding gested by H a l l and others.  sex, as sug-  Stagings where participants were a l l female  37 were associated with closer distances between persons than when the group was  composed of both sexes.  Such a generalization i s supported by data  from the f i r s t three staging assignments—Family quarrel, Gossiping, Interview—but not the last set of scenes, Public, where a common distance of nine feet was maintained  between the speaker and audience  whether p a r t i -  cipants were female and/or male. In stagings of a family quarrel, the most frequent distance between female  participants was  to f i v e feet when a male was  two to three feet, t h i s increasing to three part of the group.  The same pattern i s suggested for the gossip session, although any generalization here i s a b i t tenuous—females tend to keep two feet apart while f o r males the distance i s two and a half f e e t . In the Interview, distances between applicant or employee and employer are greater when the group i s composed of males and females rather than a l l female.  (There i s only one instance of an all-male interview, so  nothing can be said about how  i t d i f f e r s or i s similar to a female  one.)  Difference i n distance i s between s i x to s i x and a half feet for mixed groups, f i v e to f i v e and a half feet for those composed of females only. The amount of movement or adjustment of distances may  be  sex-  linked, but the data y i e l d s only the hint that there i s more frequent . adjustment of distances i n mixed groups than i n all-female ones.  If t h i s  i s so, perhaps i t would be possible with a more detailed analysis of this part of the data from stagings, and observations of group situations, to explain how  all-female groups are more i n h i b i t e d i n moving than mixed  groups. S t i l l considering 'mobility' there are considerable differences  38 in scenes, the most "distance sets' (number of d i f f e r e n t distances between participants i n any one staging) occuring i n the Family Quarrel, then a considerable drop f o r stagings of a Gossip session, and decreases i n movement again f o r both Interview and Public scenes—a progression from movement to 'rootedness' which supports the writer's suggestion that the four situations selected f o r the assignment can be put on a continuum. Family Quarrel  -> Gossiping  Interview  l e l e d by something c a l l e d 'mobile/non-mobile'.  Thus,  *> Public can be paralHow  to t y p i f y the mobility  continuum and to r e l a t e i t to situations i s a problem to be linked to other dimensions  such as informal/formal, personal/impersonal, private/public,  emotionality/neutrality. Coupled with the above movement scale, furniture (in the case of 2  stagings minimal—a  chair or bench) i s used more often  i n the Interview  and Public scenes than i n the Family Quarrel or Gossip session. And, as w e l l , participants seem to become t i e d to chairs i f they are used. Even when actors l e f t t h e i r chairs, they migrated back to them. For example, i n one counselling session a boy seated i n front of a Vicep r i n c i p a l ' s desk leaves his chair to pace back and f o r t h , but he keeps returning to the chair.  It i s as i f there i s a distance threshold—one  can move so f a r but no farther or the s i t u a t i o n boundaries w i l l weaken or collapse. In two family quarrels, the same boy playing the role of Father opens the scene s i t t i n g on a chair pretending to read a newspaper and being interrupted by wife or daughter.  During both these stagings he gets up  from the chair but does not leave i t , rather stands close to or walks around i t .  He c e r t a i n l y could have moved elsewhere on the stage, but he  39 did not. Consider two examples from the Public group of stagings where the student playing the active role of speaker went for a podium, placed i t on the g r i d (in both cases far upstage—eight the audience was  or nine feet from where  to s i t ) and confined himself to movement behind i t .  In  the case of a boy playing the role of school p r i n c i p a l addressing an assembly, the actor walked a few feet away from the podium as he talked but always returned to behind i t .  Part of our conception of public setting  such as this i s that i f the V.I.P. i s using a furniture prop, i t w i l l be placed between him and h i s l i s t e n e r s . Are there p a r t i c u l a r differences i n s p a t i a l patterns i n groups of d i f f e r e n t numbers?  Do groups of three or four use closer distances  among members than for a dyad, or vice-versa? found when stagings were checked.  No consistent patterns were  Moreover, one cannot simply compare two  and three person groups—sex of participants must be taken into account as we have seen previously that there tend to be s l i g h t l y greater distances among participants i n a mixed group than i f the group i s made up of females only.  However, can one say something about the preference for a particular  number of persons i n the group for various situations? In both the Family Quarrel and Business Interview, there i s no pattern of more frequent groupings  into twos or threes.  One would have thought that there would  be more two-people groups, but this i s not so i n the stagings. 5/C stagings are three person.  In fact,  In the Gossip scenes there appear to be,  at f i r s t glance, more groups of three than two, but several triads are formed by one participant entering late and r e a l l y remaining an outsider, or  displacing one  member of the o r i g i n a l paic,  40  In the Public s i t u a t i o n there are more people i n the stagings than i n the other scenes, the minimal number being three, one staging having f i v e p a r t i c i p a n t s . Does Public automatically imply more people? For the drama students, the number of persons was used ao a signal of the setting, as was distance (remembering that a greater distance than i n any of the previous scenes. was used).  Uneasy Verbal and S p a t i a l Communication  According to Hymes, ...instances of the breaking off of communication, or uneasiness in i t , are good evidence of the presence of a r u l e or expectation about speaking (1962:30). This i s not limited to verbal behaviour.  H a l l adopts such a perspective  when he points out that i t i s often only when rules are broken that we r e a l i z e they e x i s t , a similar point being made by Goffman (1953:36-36)-acts which cause embarrassment provide us with a chance to study the assumptions we make about i n t e r a c t i o n .  These s i t u a t i o n a l infractions d i r -  ect us to elements of ordinary situations which would otherwise not l i k e l y be noticed. Pike, dealing with the same point, notes that resistance to being interrupted indicates that some 'behavioreme pattern i s occuring and that 1  such a unit merits attention. Finding that several stagings had been disrupted by actors f a l ling out of r o l e , having a moment of awkwardness or there being a noticeable and uneasy pause, i t was decided to check the data f o r instances of these occurences to see i f they indicated what should happen, i . e . , what  the 'standard' pattern i s . Since people communicate by using space as w e l l as words, i t seemed quite l i k e l y that i n the series of 44 stagings there would be instances of breaks which might t e l l us something  about  spatial  rules of behaviour. F i r s t , a f a i r l y exhaustive l i s t of dialogue passages which are considered uneasy are outlined to see i f there i s corresponding non-verbal uneasiness.  Looking at these patches leads one to generalizations about  the structure of s o c i a l behaviour but t h i s w i l l be kept minimal since the central interest here i s to f i n d out about s p a t i a l patterns and adjustments To deal with the dialogue of stagings as data i t i s intended to consider instances of actors' uneasiness, the same f o r the audience, outof-role behaviour, and d i f f i c u l t i e s i n ending stagings. Take f o r an i l l u s t r a t i o n of actors' uneasiness an impromptu gossip session between two g i r l s which begins with one g i r l asking the other "What are you doing?" and i s punctuated throughout by Vicky:  U e l l , what's new? ... Well, what a l l has happened?... U e l l , uh, what's new?...  the co-actress f a i l i n g to carry the conversational b a l l .  Vicky f a l l s back  on awkward opening formulae to hopefully e l i c i t enough reply to continue the scene.  Perhaps i t i s not i n s i g n i f i c a n t to note that the scene contin-  ued at a l l - - i t would have been quite sensible for the g i r l s to stop and say that they did not know what to say or "It's your turn to t a l k " but they did not and the staging carried on, precariously, f o r oneand a half minutes IThat rules do we f i n d here?  Certainly one of r e c i p r o c i t y — d o i n g  one's share i n a conversation. The 'speak when spoken t o rule i s insuf1  f i c i e n t — i n a s i t u a t i o n defined as communicative and s o c i a l there i s an  expectation and i m p l i c i t demand that participants w i l l take turns carrying the conversation.  Oral codes are public property (Joos, 1962), the assump-  t i o n we make being that everyone i s aware of them and can perform i n a taken for-granted fashion.  If dialogue breaks down i n a casual conversation i t  w i l l usually lapse into silence while a consultative one w i l l be broken off. The leading participant i n the staging not only had to resort to f i s h i n g techniques but she gave a considerable number of verbal 'awkward indicators' which included You know.,. Well... Uh yeah... Nor was her partner, who was  less than r e c i p r o c a l i n the conversation, free  of s o c i a l noise either; for example--"We11, I mean, you know, I was wondering how  just  f a r you know...."  The same kind of thing occured i n other stagings. a two minute conversation punctuated  For example,  by eighteen expressions of 'I know  1  or 'You know'. A business interview with twenty-two 'uh's', f i f t e e n 'oh's' and nine 'well's'.  Or a staging ofaschool room, the g i r l playing the r o l e  of teacher having the following uncertainty spots: Uh, w e l l . . . Well, uh...No, uh w e l l . Uhwell... Well a l r i g h t then... A l r i g h t . . . So, w e l l , a l r i g h t . . . Oh yeah... These f i l l e r s are, according to Joos, code labels or formulae which ident i f y the s i t u a t i o n , i n this case, as consultative. However, Joos' label 'consultative , which he says i s "our norm for coming to terms with stran1  gers" (1962:19) i s far too wide i n terms of data from the stagings, for the  43 'I know's' and 'well's' are not confined to stagings i n the S o c i a l Consultative group but occur, p a r t i c u l a r l y , i n Gossip stagings which represent Hall's personal/casual  category.  Another case of Goffman's statement that even though we may perform badly and clumsily, we must perform, i s i l l u s t r a t e d by a staging from category 2 where two g i r l s have the following uncertain l i n e s : Karen: Chris: Karen: Chris: Their uneasiness  H i . Oh, I got something great to t e l l you. Uh, I forgot what i t was though. H e l l think. Great Well  i s assuaged by the entry of a t h i r d actor and the r e l i e f  i s apparent as the g i r l s say 'Hi Bob'. In another staging xvhere ad-libbing breaks down:  the uneasiness  Linda: Diane: Linda: Diane:  Really? Yeah Well um, where to? To the party  Linda:  Oh, the party, oh the party (pause)  i s terminated by an abrupt switch i n dialogue to Diane:  Linda,  Lookit, we got to go now.  however, does not latch on t o the reprieve immediately as she  stumbles through Linda:  Oh w e l l , can't you. What-Oh h e l l you guys...  In the course of a staging of an Interview one actress playing the part of an employer i s thrown off balance by her acting partner saying Marilyn:  Do I leave now?  Certainly a legitimate request f o r information, yet inappropriate to the business s i t u a t i o n where one i s supposed to 'know' the i m p l i c i t cues and rules of leave-taking.  44 Another question i n the same staging:  "You don't want to t a l k to  me?" i s again an instance of inappropriate verbalizing of a reasonable sort of question.  The reply suggests f l u s t e r i n g : Pat;  No, I don't want to--well, I've already, um, there's more. No, I ' l l n o t i f y you i f anything ...  The t h i r d r o l e player i n the staging, who enters after the above dialogue, responds to a question of: Pat:  Well, Miss Jenkins, uh i s there anything else you'd like to t e l l me that you f e e l uh i s important and that could add to your...  with "Ask me more questions" which hardly decreases the discomfort  of Pat,  who was having d i f f i c u l t y with the ad-libbing and t r y i n g to set up a r e l i e f spot. A case of audience reaction of uneasiness suggests that something going on i n a staging i s amiss.  again  There i s , of course, a basic  problem of ascertaining i f and when the audience i s uneasy before one can look for the possible reasons.  The writer can only claim that because the  uneasiness--an atmosphere of discomfort,  a too quiet quiet, a change i n the  'mood' of the audience--was communicated, i t i s legitimate to t a l k about i t . Surely the investigator, as well as the actors, i s q u a l i f i e d as a member of the same culture to make such interpretations since the assessment of s o c i a l situations i n everyday l i f e alone requires many  taken-for-granted  rules, and the assumption that a l l concerned share the same basic codes. An uneasy reaction occured several times when actors came out with d i r t y words or references to sexual behaviour.  For example, one boy at a  point i n a staging of a gossip session where he i s presenting a monologue about Stephen Truscott case, crescendoes to a f u l l  volume line that:  45  ...They believe that she, that he wanted to take her into the bush and that he was sexually hard up that night and he just took any broad he could see on the street and took Lynn Harper into the bush... an immediate hush f a l l i n g on the audience.  Even the boy who delivered the  lines seemed s t a r t l e d and his co-actor p l a i n l y was  embarrassed and  blushed.  The same reaction followed a scene of a boy playing the role of a c h i l d arguing with his father about T.V.  program s e l e c t i o n .  The actor's  high pitched whiney voice and t e a r f u l : Mommy said I could watch cartoons i f I was a good boy. Popeye's on. I want to watch Popeye. Mommy said I could watch Popeye. was  followed by an uncomfortable quiet and 'oh' from the audience and 3  another blushing co-actor . An uncomfortable audience reaction also occured i n response to a f i n a l insult hurled by one g i r l to another, the g i r l s playing parts of mother and daughter.  In t h i s case, the mother of the pair screams "You  suckhole" which not only shocks the audience but the actresses as w e l l , for the scene ends most abruptly and b l u n t l y . There are spots i n the stagings where actors laugh out of role at their own or others' l i n e s .  In a l l cases where t h i s occurs during a  staging the conversation i s simply picked up again after the awkward interval. One  staging ends before the end, so to speak, when the actor  delivering a speech smiles and turns his head away from his stage audience to look at h i s classmates  on the sidelines as he gives his concluding  He quickly looks back to the two g i r l s playing audience f o r him but are already getting up from their chairs and leaving the g r i d . and moves to s i t down with his f r i e n d s .  line.  they  P h i l shrugs  46  A different kind of break occurs i n one staging whore, the conversation on s i s t e r s dwindling, there i s a sudden "Here comes the bus" which ends the scene. In another case, two g i r l s having an impromptu gossip session, and also running out of dialogue, there i s a switch from Vicky : Well uh (pause) Well what's new? Brenda: Well nothing's you know. French class and French tests and uh to Vicky : Oh you know, I got a, I got a new bur-, bureau f o r my room. Do you want to see it? The most obvious breaks i n role playing are i l l u s t r a t e d by the following cases. In a Gossip s i t u a t i o n which i s ending with "Close the doors when you leave" Linda giggles and says "Oops, that's i t " as the other two p a r t i cipants leave. A similar s i t u a t i o n occurs i n an Interview where a guest on a T.V. program i s explaining the f l y i n g saucer she has seen—she runs out of remarks and there i s an awkward pause.  The g i r l acting as Interviewer  suddenly says, e n t h u s i a s t i c a l l y , Oh I'm so sorry our time seems t o be running out. Uh... prompting  an out of r o l e 'That's good" from the other g i r l who smiles and  turns her head s l i g h t l y to quickly look at the audience. "Join us again tomorrow evening", the next l i n e , i s punctuated with laughter and the scene breaks up. Two incidents of f a l l i n g out of role occur i n another staging of an interview, t h i s time of an Estonian immigrant on Station ICDP. It  47  should be noted that the two boys i n the staging had spent about f i f t e e n minutes previous to the scene planning dialogue. The boy playing the part of interviewer asks half-way through the staging "...Uh do you know anything besides yes and farming steppes?" and there i s a sudden pause.  In a loud stage whisper he says to his fellow  actor "You blew i t " and they both laugh.  The audience snickers. The  Estonian player picks up a line "No" and the staging continues u n t i l , dialogue becoming rather mumbled, one boy suddenly  turns from facing h i s  co-actor to look at the audience and say "Hey Petey, can we quit now?" a remark addressed to the drama teacher.  This i s the only instance i n a l l  the stagings of actors dropping their roles to ask instructions or permission to terminate the staging.  In a l l other cases the students struggled  through to some 'end . 1  In summary of the above cases, uneasiness communication does not cause s p a t i a l adjustments.  or break i n verbal The only suggestion  of  this i s i n the three cases where actors turn away from the other players which could be interpreted as an attempt to increase distance. To turn to parts of stagings where there i s s p a t i a l or breaks, how i s i t expressed,  uneasiness  does i t affect verbal communication and  is i t r e f l e c t e d i n disturbances i n dialogue? Cases of d i s t o r t i o n i n distances between interacting persons w i l l be outlined according to three general areas:  physical contact, the  'pursuing perplex' and decreasing distance. To deal with the f i r s t area, the rule of n o l i me tangere i s apparent i n one particular staging where i t i s violated, although the r u l e breaking i s i n keeping with the action i n the scene.  In t h i s staging, a  48  family quarrel where a mother and son are arguing about a hair cut f o r the l a t t e r , the participants are four feet apart as the conversation progresses to: So: Mo: So: Mo:  Listen Mom. I'm not like a l l those kind of people. H e l l you look i t . Just because I grow my hair long doesn't mean that I'm a, I'm a, a grub or something. Oh  where Mo quickly moves i n on the son, to a distance of one foot, equally quickly p u l l i n g his h a i r .  There i s an immediate reaction for both of them—  they p r a c t i c a l l y spring apart to a distance of 3% feet betxveen them i n what seems to be an attempt to neutralize the contact.  There i s no notice-  able pause i n the dialogue as i t continues to a speedy end: So: Mo: So:  Now cut that out. Gee whiz Mom. (screaming) Get your hair cut. (shouting) Go to h e l l .  Mo:  Don't you (pause) -- Get out.  Look--  The only other case of physical contact i n the Quarrel series does not cause s p a t i a l adjustment.  Rather, uneasiness i s expressed i n  most awkward posture, s t i f f n e s s and leaning away from the other person. In the staging an e x - g i r l f r i e n d meets the boyfriend and his new steady x-;ho are arm i n arm.  However, the attempt to express intimacy between the  two i s f a r from natural--although the g i r l ' s arms are around the boyfriend t h e i r bodies are held s t i f f l y apart and the boy has an arm raised i n front of him, a rather inappropriate signal of defense under the circumstances. Yet i t i s quite clear to the audience and the observer what the intent of physical contact was. The case of the 'pursuing perplex' occurs i n another quarrel s i t u a t i o n , t h i s time between s i s t e r s .  Repeated subtle adjustments of  distance between the two g i r l s gives the impression of a chase as one moves back and the other advances.  The chase begins with a distance of 3% feet  Jwhich has a special quality, according to H a l l , being within arm's r e a c h beyond t h i s distance, about 3% feet, one i s outside the limit of physical domination  (1966:113)) between the g i r l s being decreased by the 'Pursuer'  leaning towards the other g i r l who moves back about half a foot, gaining no distance, however, because the pursuer moves forward u n t i l the distance is two f e e t .  The distance i s further cut as P (pursuer) leans forward,  shouting, the s i s t e r p u l l i n g away her head and shoulders as her arm i s grabbed. for  Although her reaction indicates that the distance i s 'too close  comfort' she does not move away immediately.  and P again leans forward,  As the arguing continues  the other g i r l begins to move back, upstage  and to the side a few inches at a time u n t i l the distance i s a l i t t l e over four f e e t .  P now has to turn s l i g h t l y to face the s i s t e r and says "Look at  me" as she closes the distance to 2% f e e t .  P wins her argument and steps  back from the s i s t e r 2 feet but, the distance adjusting reversed, the s i s t e r now moves forward so that the 'tentative' distance of 5 feet i s only 4 f e e t .  The staging ends with the g i r l s moving downstage, distance  increasing s l i g h t l y . Short spots i n other stagings suggest t h i s same adjustment process but not to the extent of meriting the t i t l e  Pursuing.  There are several cases of distance between interacting  persons  being decreased by leaning. In one p a r t i c u l a r Family Quarrel (a segment already outlined on page 48) a distance of four feet between participants i s decreased by the male r o l e player both moving closer and leaning forward so as he r e p l i e s  So to "Get your hair cut" with "Ho" he i s 1% feet from his stage partner playing the r o l e of mother.  Although her comments are not inhibited by  the move, a few lines further she moves back, re-establishing the distance at four f e e t . There are two cases of this kind of adjustment i n the Gossip group of stagings.  In one, three seated g i r l s lean f a r forward i n their  chairs, maintaining a strained position f o r the duration of the scene. The staging begins with two g i r l s seated half-facing each other with a t h i r d chair empty.  If s i t t i n g back i n their chairs the g i r l s would be  about 4% feet apart but since both are leaning forward, the distance between t h e i r heads i s only 2% f e e t . When the t h i r d g i r l enters she moves the empty chair to about six inches from that of the next g i r l and on s i t t i n g down leans f a r f o r ward towards the g i r l opposite her.  If the chair had remained i n i t s  o r i g i n a l p o s i t i o n , and i f the t h i r d g i r l had sat back i n i t , she would have been 5-5% feet away from the opposite g i r l .  It seems quite clear by  (a) moving the chair closer and (b) leaning forward, distance uneasiness is being expressed—a  potential distance of more than f i v e feet i s too  great f o r this staging and requires adjustment techniques. The other case i s of a conversation between two seated g i r l s being interrupted by a boy who, coming on stage, stands back and between the g i r l s who are four feet apart.  One g i r l leaves and P h i l s i t s down on  the edge of the chair, p u l l i n g i t a few inches forward, and leaning towards the g i r l opposite him so that the distance i s decreased to roughly 2 3/4 feet.  Is i t simply idiosyncratic that f o r the occupants of that chair  different distances were comfortable?  Possibly, but more l i k e l y i s a  51  change i n the s i t u a t i o n from casual conversation to •conspiratual' probing, P h i l wanting to f i n d out what v/as being said about him. The distance i n two p a r t i c u l a r interviews seems distorted and strained for the duration of the stagings.  In one case, a Business  Interview with two female p a r t i c i p a n t s , the g i r l s are seated apart.  eight feet  The g i r l assuming the r o l e of interviewer leaned forward  i n her  chair every time she asked a question of her partner who d i d likewise when answering i n the r o l e of job applicant.  In comparison to other  stagings i n t h i s series the distance was considerably greater than the usual 5-6 foot or less distance.  Even according to 'Hallian" rules the  distance i s too great, 5% - 8 feet being usual with anything approaching the upper l i m i t , such as i n t h i s staging, indicating considerable formality and d i f f e r e n t i a l importance of one p a r t i c i p a n t . The fact that compensat i o n v/as made f o r the distance between participants suggests that a closer span, to the point where leaning would not be necessary for communication, would be the appropriate and comfortable  distance for t h i s p a r t i c u l a r  situation. There i s some support f o r considering the l i k e l i h o o d that the g i r l s i n the above case were aware of the distance, f o r they set their chairs on the g r i d . it  Furthermore, one g i r l instructed the other to "Move  (the chair) back Susan" and Susan put the chair 1% feet back from where  she had f i r s t placed i t so that the distance between chairs would have been 9 - 9 % feet instead of 8 f e e t .  Susan then says "Move yours c l o s e r " .  The other g i r l does so and the chair i s shifted, again about a foot and a half so that the adjustment r e a l l y does not change the distance at a l l . The other Interview staging, which indicates s p a t i a l  uneasiness  52 v i a leaning, i s a case of two g i r l s seated  facing each other, the distance  between them being 6% feet which, i f we follow H a l l , i s perfectly for the s i t u a t i o n .  'normal'  But, throughout the staging-)participants lean forward  towards interviewer or interviewee as the case may be, every time a quest i o n i s asked or answered the verbally active person decreasing the d i s tance . In neither of the above cases nor the Gossip or Quarrel stagings does the distance awkwardness interrupt or jeopardize the conversation which i s being carried on. It would appear that both verbal and non-verbal discomfort occur without changed or corresponding adjustments plementary  i n the com-  sphere.  Social Boundaries  The behaviour pattern runs i t s course i n time: i t consists of a sequence of part-actions which has a beginning and an end-the assumption of a particular task, i t s execution and complet i o n (Nadel, 1951:75) . Although stagings were largely impromptu, most have a d i s t i n c t and conventional beginning, and break off with a tidy end.  The students  i n their productions had a distinguishable opening move and a conclusion. Social s c i e n t i s t s may have trouble t e l l i n g where a s i t u a t i o n or unit of interaction begins or ends, but there i s l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y doing so i n the stagings. In one staging of a Famly Quarrel, after arguments about money, a father f i n a l l y hands over two dollars with a "Get l o s t " line while another ends with "Oh shut up". A high pitched quarrel going on between a mother and daughter ends with daughter walking out with the line "Okay, you stay here and do  53  the dishes and I'm going to the aftergrad". A mother walks out on two daughters i n another case t e l l i n g the two of them to "Fight i t out". One staging ends with a mother t e l l i n g her long-haired, barbershy son to "Get out" after he has shouted "Go to h e l l " . In the second group of stagings, Gossiping, 'tidy' ends include: 'Bye Jack", "Well uh we got to go now Jack...", "Oh, here he comes". I l l u s t r a t i v e cases i n the Interviews s i t u a t i o n include "Oh, l i k e demonstration?  Oh sure!", "Okay, thank  "Very good, thank you very much.  you  you very much s i r . Right".  We'll c a l l you i f we need you".  Bob : Okay then, you can have the job. Chris: Oh, oh! Bob : Okay Joe. Lower the grapes. Conclusions i n the Public group include "Hallelujah" from a r e l i g i o u s healer, 'Three cheers, hurray" from three g i r l s making up the audience for a campaigner f o r mayor and Mike : I close t h i s meeting. Rick : So do I. John : ...Firecrackers, f i r e c r a c k e r s , s i s boom bah Wart hogs, wart hogs, rah rah rah. There are exceptions to the neat concluding pattern. For example, i n one Interview, there i s an awkward ending as the Interviewer says Barb : Okay then. A l r i g h t Miss Ranchoux. We'll n o t i f y you i n the mail and t e l l you i f (pause) you're (pause) you can take i t . The l i n e could be perfectly conclusive i f not delivered i n a f a l t e r i n g , hesitant voice as the staging fades away rather than terminates. In a staging of a Family Quarrel where daughter i s defending a boyfriend of the 'robes and beads' set and mother i s shouting that no long-haired creature i s going to enter the house, the scene breaks off  54  with both t e l l i n g the other to "Shut up". Tension i n the staging had reached a high l e v e l , such that some 'rebalancing' would seem needed but the g i r l s broke up the scene simply by stopping at this point and looking at the audience \jh.o did not seem sure that the staging had ended f o r there was a considerable pause before the usual applause. As f o r the beginning of scenes there i s usually a greeting of some sort.  Beginnings, according to Goffman (1963:22) occur when, after  one person has made an opening sign, the other acknowledges and responds. Following such a d e f i n i t i o n , conventional openers include: Family Quarrel  Da: Ho:  Mom, could I have the car? Well I don't see why not dear.  So: Fa:  Uh Dad. What d'you want?  So: Mo:  Mom? Yes?  Judy: Barb:  Gossip  A: Hi B: Hi (3/9 cases) Vicky: Brenda:  Interview  Barbara, look at this room... Well why don't you clean i t up then?  Hi Brenda, what you doing? Oh, uh, just you know, the usual thing...  Ray: Terry:  Hey man, what do you think about... Oh, I think he...  Alida: Brian:  Hey have you guys, have you guys heard... Yeah, I'm going to that.  Diane: Linda:  Yes? My name i s . . .  Bob: Phil: Bob: Marilyn:  Come i n (5/8 cases). Good afternoon s i r . Can I help you? My name i s Mr. Brascia... Yes, what can I do for you? We're applying for the job.  55 In the Public group of stagings, openers are not i n the form of greetings but rather acknowledgments of the audience. Mike:  Brothuhs and sistuhs, the Lawd is with us today.  John:  Welcome brothers, welcome brothers. As you a l l know fellow wart hogs...  Linda:  Good afternoon l a d i e s . I'd l i k e to welcome a l l you new members...  Phil:  Students,  of Grade 12 graduatin' c l a s s . . .  Some stagings began i n more jarring fashion. Karen: Rick: Pat: Barb: Darlene: The  For instance:  For example:  Anna you l i t t l e brat. What a swine you got for a s i s t e r . The mayorship of Smalltown has been run, over-run by men. You f e e l you q u a l i f y for t h i s job, right? What are you looking at?  least that one can say about a beginning-ending  pattern i s  that students asked to play out situations structured t h e i r scenes i n similar ways and used a common repertoire of devices for starting and f i n i s h i n g , which i s not a new  statement by any means.  Goffman, for instance,  points out that there are rules for the i n i t i a t i o n and termination of encounters (1961, 1964).  Further, he says  ...minor ceremonies are l i k e l y to be employed to mark the termination of the engagement and the entrance and departure of p a r t i c u l a r p a r t i c i p a n t s . These ceremonies along with the s o c i a l participants i n l i n e , give a kind of r i t u a l closer to the mutual a c t i v i t y sustained i n the encounter (1959:98). Once individuals enter a conversation they are obliged to continue i t u n t i l they have the kind of basis for withdrawing that w i l l neutralize the p o t e n t i a l l y offensive implications of taking leave of others (Goffman, 1957:5). Conversation  i s one kind of s o c i a l encounter.  Barker (1961) notes that each setting has a boundary which lets one know i f he i s inside or outside, Pittenger (1960) making the  56 same observation when he writes about boundary markers and signals which t e l l us that something has begun or ended. M i l l e r (1961) follows suit with the generalization that a meeting between two people i s a meaningful sequence with a beginning, middle and termination. Is i t npt s i g n i f i c a n t that students did perform at a l l ?  Would  persons other than this class of drama students—perhaps i n another culture, of d i f f e r e n t age, i n a non-school setting, etc.--asked to do the same task of presenting a facet of l i f e i n a few minutes even be able to produce something?  Lerner's ethnography of Turkish peasants (1958) indicates  that at least f o r these people one cannot assume the same kinds of things one takes f o r granted i n performance.  To a question "What would you do i f  you were president of Turkey?" peasants responded, often shocked, i n the vein of "What are you talking about?  I couldn't even imagine such a thing."  Such people had no way of even handling the idea, no way of dealing with "If you were...".  The drama students d i d .  Goffman's point that, i n f a c t , "We a l l act better than we know how" (1959:74) i s worthwhile keeping i n mind as one r e a l i z e s that i t i s s i g n i f i c a n t that the drama students responded to t h e i r assignment by performing, largely with l i t t l e d i f f i c u l t y . not  There i s no reason they could  have responded with "We can't" or "I don't know how" or even "No" but  they (a) did not question what they were asked to do and imagine and (b) d i d i n fact play out situations ranging from family f i g h t i n g to public lectures which included many roles some of them could not r e a l i s t i c a l l y assume.  57  FOOTNOTES  1.  It should be noted that the frequent distance pattern of 4-6 feet i n the Intervievr set of stagings occured between participants who were friends and who had free choice i n selection of co-actors. Perhaps i t i s not to be expected that, even though the 'event' was a BusinessInterview, they would use distances such as 7 to 8 feet f o r , i n spite of the d e f i n i t i o n and formal boundaries of the s i t u a t i o n , f a m i l i a r patterns of friendship (including s p a t i a l habits such as proximity) over-ruled any a r b i t r a r y impersonality.  2. Category Scenes chair used 1 2 4 3.  5 5 11 5  Total # scenes 15 12 16 3  %  Increment  33.0 41.7 6 s:. 8 62.5  The student delivering the line was considered a ' f a i r y ' by members of the class and there were references and jokes about his feminine behaviour both during stagings and out of c l a s s .  CHAPTER 5 DISCUSSION OF METHODOLOGY AND THEORETICAL ORIENTATION  The concern of t h i s chapter i s with problems i n the staging project and both Hall's t h e o r e t i c a l approach and n a t u r a l i s t i c observations about proxemic matters. To deal with the f i r s t issue, d i f f i c u l t i e s encountered  i n stagings,  as a method of c o l l e c t i n g information on s p a t i a l patterns, w i l l be d i s cussed, followed by suggestions of how stagings could be improved. D i f f i c u l t i e s with the project arose from i t being carried out within the boundaries of an i n s t i t u t i o n , s p e c i f i c a l l y a school.  To compre-  hensively analyse the major problems with administration, s t a f f and students would require a lengthy thesis i n i t s e l f as there are direct  implications  for what may be c a l l e d the covert sub-culture of the school.  However, the  following notes w i l l perhaps give an introductory i l l u s t r a t i o n of takenfor-granted behaviour.  Uhile such a diversion i s somewhat aside from a  discussion of the methodological semi-experiment, i t i s argued that i t w i l l point out that the staging project did not occur i n i s o l a t i o n .  'Life went  on as usual' at the school but not without some disturbances f o r both school and investigator, e s p e c i a l l y when the l a t t e r was taken f o r a student. For example, being stopped several times i n the h a l l by a teacher and asked to present the required permission s l i p f o r being out of c l a s s . Some s t a f f automatically t i t l e d the investigator 'Student  Teacher'.  Being labelled "Researcher" was, although more accurate (and d i g n i f i e d ) , no help as some teachers were suspicious of anything academic. The  50  59  researcher's explanation of being interested i n experimental drama usually terminated probing. D e f i n i t i o n v i s - a - v i s students was a problem, p a r t i c u l a r l y at i n i t i a l encounters with the drama class, since my appearance suggested a school g i r l ; yet I directed the class i n several periods of movement'.  'experimental  I wanted to be as taken-for-granted as possible by the class  so that the project x^ould not be contaminated by a stranger being present. Close to three months contact with the drama students (both i n and out of class) seemed to eliminate any i n h i b i t i o n s , and.I was an assistant drama teacher.  loosely defined as  When the students were given instructions to  'perform' i n the project they viewed the assignment as somewhat of a favour to the assistant, and a different kind of drama exercise. One could not plan a week's schedule of stagings without running into p r a c t i c a l problems, such as the auditorium being booked for an assembly or half the drama class scheduled f o r innoculations. To adjust the schedule of ing  the project was a minimal d i f f i c u l t y , b u t f o r one administrator the r e s u l t confusion, usually at the last minute, suggested further reasons for  doubting the usefulness of the investigator.  The investigator had been •  in the school frequently for over a year prior to the drama project, as a public r e l a t i o n s link between a team of university researchers and the school, and this administrator had a p a r t i c u l a r l y d i f f i c u l t time c l a s s i fying her. Leaving aside the above i l l u s t r a t i o n of d i f f i c u l t i e s to do with the project being conducted  i n a school, the following section w i l l deal  with questions about the project i t s e l f .  Then come suggestions of how  stagings could both be more c o n t r o l l e d — a s an experimental e x e r c i s e — o r  60  less structured, which could provide different kinds of information. Several c r i t i c i s m s can be l e v e l l e d at the organization of stagings.  There i s ambiguity and confusion regarding experimental control  versus 'free action'. Limiting the number of persons per staging which, i t was argued elsewhere, was necessary for p r a c t i c a l reasons, nevertheless imposed what may  be an 'unnatural' l i m i t .  This i s suggested by the Public  group of stagings where, although the minimal numbers rule was e f f e c t , more than two or three people took part.  s t i l l in  Yet, for the other three  groups of stagings one could argue that a dyad, i n p a r t i c u l a r , is not only normal but usual i n everyday situations of t h i s nature. A similar l i m i t was  imposed, again for the sake of s i m p l i c i t y ,  by asking students to do without props unless absolutely necessary.  It  can e a s i l y be argued that having a family quarrel, for example, without 'home' props such as rooms and furniture makes questionable any conclusions about the s p a t i a l patterns involved.  However, to repeat an argu-  ment that continues through the thesis, the students did act out various s o c i a l situations which involved s p a t i a l arrangements of p a r t i c i p a n t s . And, even without a normal setting for the action, the students had to c a l l on some past learning or less-than-conscious structuring of s o c i a l situations to be able to act--their performance would, minimally, r e f l e c t t h i s perceptual organization. A debate on whether or not the stagings do r e p l i c a t e actual s o c i a l situations i s not the central concern here, for the writer does not claim to be proving such.  Ideally, the staging project would have been paral-  l e l e d by actual observation and p a r t i c i p a t i o n i n the various s o c i a l episodes.  A later chapter  (6) suggests that a great deal of observation  of interaction i n i t s "raw form" (Turner, 1966) would have to be done. Further, i f portrayal of s o c i a l roles can be cogently compared to 'the r e a l thing' i t i s suggested that dramatizations provide a quick picture of a wide range of a c t i v i t i e s . But t h i s argument i s a diversion from the point that students i n the drama stagings did use s p a t i a l patterns, and had to, i n spite of the fact that they were missing a conventional s e t t i n g . A somewhat different c r i t i c i s m concerns the s p a t i a l aspect i n stagings--from what points are distances going to be measured between persons?  After the f i r s t few stagings and a look at accompanying photo-  graphs i t became apparent different ways.  that distances would have to be measured i n  If students were side by side the important distance v/as  shoulder-shoulder, and applied whether persons were standing or s i t t i n g . If actors were s i t t i n g , facing each other, a foot-foot measurement i s meaningless since faces and bodies, not feet, were 'communicating Face-to-face makes more sense. body which was  It v/as obviously the upper part of the  important i n communication,for people would often  lean  forward, either standing or seated, decreasing distance. There are references i n the l i t e r a t u r e to t h i s kind of measurement problem, often elaborate discussions being given to nose-to-nose versus any other part of the anatomy as the important distance i n interaction.  For present purposes, simply note that measurement of distance  i n stagings v/as adjusted r e l a t i v e to physical orientations of participant Shoulder-shoulder  or face-to-face distances were generally used but some  personal judgment v/as exercised for other orientations. It i s obvious that with the amount of a c t i v i t y going on i n  62  stagings i t was  impossible for the observer to make complete notes.  graphs and tapes helped considerably but nothing less than a f i l m with synchronized sound could accurately 'preserve  1  Photo-  continuous  the stagings.  This, of course, would lead one to new problems of data analysis, particul a r l y the time to take account of every aspect of behaviour which would, with complete records, be a v a i l a b l e . A cinematic record was not even considered by the investigator p r e c i s e l y for t h i s , and economic, reason(s). C r i t i c i s m of stagings could continue ad infinitum but would become tedious and tangent to the point of a monologue about methodology per se. Improvements of the staging method could take one of two d i r e c t i o n s . The extreme i n s o p h i s t i c a t i o n of a rigorous experimental  study could chart  movement by having scenes played out on an e l e c t r i c a l l y sensitive g r i d . by using RDF  Or  equipment which would receive radio signals, from miniature  transmitters unobtrusively worn by participants, which would p r e c i s e l y locate persons on the g r i d .  The epitome of absurdity (perhaps) could be  coded ink stamps on the feet of participants whose ink blots would be permanently recorded on g r i d size sheets of paper.  Such precise information  would lend i t s e l f to stringent s t a t i s t i c a l a n a l y s i s . A less cumbersome study u t i l i z i n g stagings could involve experimenting  with distance patterns  by instructing actors to adjust the space between them (similar to experiment of Horowitz, 1965).  Would these s p a t i a l changes affect the major focus  of interaction, verbal or non-verbal? distance was  an important  If so, there i s a l i k e l i h o o d that  aspect of the interaction; at least, part of the  s o c i a l pattern. S t a t i s t i c a l analysis i s peripheral to the study of s o c i a l  63  interaction i f one i s studying dynamics and process, rather than d i s t r i b u t i o n , which interest can lead one f a r from refined (confined?) small group experiments.  A record of the 'process' of s o c i a l situations could best be  obtained by a minimal amount of r i g i d i t y and a maximum of n a t u r a l i s t i c observation.  A s k i l l e d cameraman, for one, walking around the g r i d rather  than being r e s t r i c t e d to one vantage point, could catch pertinent and subtle d e t a i l that present photographs of stagings missed.  Further, as  mentioned e a r l i e r i n the chapter, p a r a l l e l i n g stagings with comparable observation of actual s o c i a l situations would greatly expand one's focus of s p a t i a l patterns. For example, i f one were interested i n s p a t i a l patterns i n Hall's Consultive bracket, s p e c i f i c a l l y the business interview, i t i s obviously sensible to observe such meetings and note (a) f u r n i t u r e arrangement and (b) i f participants i n the meeting change distance.  An ideal area f o r  such a study would be a National Employment Office where the large rooms holding 10-15  interviewers, each with his own desk, could be mapped and  frequent and regular notes made on how viewer's desk.  close interviewees sat to the i n t e r -  An advantage to this setting for observation i s that the  background of individual job seekers would be a v a i l a b l e . * For two particular groups of stagings, Family Quarrel and Gossiping, n a t u r a l i s t i c observation may  be more d i f f i c u l t , or even impossible,  which adds to the p o t e n t i a l i t y of stagings providing some information (the nature of this was  argued elsewhere) on s o c i a l behaviour or events which  are not r e a d i l y accessible to observation. To turn from questions of methodology, did the t h e o r e t i c a l orientations, based on H a l l ,  apply to the data?  In addition to d i f f i c u l t i e s  64  associated with methods to c o l l e c t information on distance patterns i n interaction, i t was  pointed out at the beginning of the chapter that Hall's  t h e o r e t i c a l formulation of the s p a t i a l dimension of s o c i a l behaviour proved less than s a t i s f a c t o r y to handle material from stagings. A major quarrel with H a l l i s his deterministic 'tone', culture being depicted as a master programmer i n the g r i p of which people are helpless to do anything but perform i n prescheduled "man  fashion.  He talks about  being programmed by culture i n a massively redundant way"(1966:96),  culture "delineating the amount and type of physical contact" (1964). i s easy, and tempting, to use  It  'cultural conditioning' as a r u b r i c covering  a l l s o c i a l a c t i v i t y but i t i s doubtful i f t h i s puts us any further ahead i n our understanding  of either the dynamics or boundaries of proxemic  phenomena. H a l l makes frequent reference to the b i o l o g i c a l sciences and inserts analogies between human and non-human animal behaviour at a regular r a t e .  Not knowing s u f f i c i e n t biology to offer an erudite c r i t i q u e ,  one i s , nevertheless, suspicious about some of his broad comparisons. One of Hall's basic terms, 'personal space', i s taken from biology--"the distance consistently separating members of non-contact species" (1966:112). contact?  But, for humans, who  i s to be c l a s s i f i e d as  non-  According to H a l l , Americans i n contrast to Frenchmen or Arabs.  Non-contact, he says, means that one avoids touching strangers. stranger/non-stranger  But the  continuum can be a highly complex matter for both  s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s and individuals as s o c i a l actors.  This writer would  claim that studying distance patterns i n connection with a s o c i a l model could be more f r u i t f u l than an imposed scheme of boundaries determined on  65  the basis of kinesthetic, o r a l , thermal, o l f a c t o r y and v i s u a l factors, as H a l l states his are.  The writer i s thinking here of an anonymity/intimacy  continuum (other s o c i a l continua  suggested on page 3.f) and whether one  codify distance patterns i n terms of these dichotomies.  can  Regular kinds of  s p a t i a l patterns are carried into and through various situations which may  not, i n spite of Hall's contention to the contrary, a l t e r the more  basic s p a t i a l dimension--perhaps thought of more i n terms of rhythm than feet or inches. Upon the basis of what seems to be an isolated experiment with G. Trager, the two conversing at different distances (1966^138; 1959:163-4), H a l l formulated eight distances for North Americans—an experiment with perhaps questionable v a l i d i t y yet he bases his scheme of c l a s s i f i c a t i o n on i t .  Except for this admission about his experimental  endeavours, H a l l  mentions 'research' but one does not f i n d s p e c i f i c reference to what and who was  studied.  Following his remark regarding the d i v i s i o n of space  into eight zones (later reducing t h i s to four) H a l l declares that "for Americans the following s h i f t s i n voice are associated with s p e c i f i c ranges of distances" (1959:164), and proceeds to outline these from 1. (3-6 inches) which i s "top secret soft whisper" to 8. (8-20 feet), a loud voice talking to a group. c e r t a i n p r e c i s i o n here.  Across  For example, he states that an audible whisper is  terms mean and what i s the  lighting.  the room  Hall's c l a s s i f i c a t i o n lacks  very c o n f i d e n t i a l while a soft voice i s only c o n f i d e n t i a l .  notes that distance may,  Very close  d i s t i n c t i o n between them?  Hall  What do these (1966:110)  of course, vary according to noise l e v e l or poor  People could, however, use other means than adjusting d i s t a n c e —  for example, increased eye contact  (Argyle and Dean, 1965).  66 Talking about informal  space, H a l l again neglects  to define i t  except to say that i t includes encounters with others and that i t i s unstated (1959:105). H a l l claims that his selection of the terms Intimate, Social and Public to describe  the distances  Personal,  people use \;as deliberate and  that these labels give "a clue as to the types o f a c t i v i t i e s and r e l a t i o n ships associated with each distance,  thereby l i n k i n g then i n people's minds  u i t h s p e c i f i c inventories of relationships and a c t i v i t i e s ' i s an a t t r a c t i v e way to j u s t i f y nebulous 1962)  1  (1966:108).  (and possibly borrowed--seeJoos,  labels but indeed no basis f o r a framework of categories  H a l l f i t s human s p a t i a l patterns.  This  into which  His labels do not necessarily, and the  investigator can attest to t h i s , mean the same thing to himself and the reader.  For example, a family quarrel was selected by the investigator  as Intimate but the distances used by participants i n stagings were not those which f i t into Hall's Intimate s l o t ^ .  Implicit i n Hall's s p a t i a l  framework i s the premise that Intimate = Close which i s not necessarily valid.  For example, husband and wife s i t t i n g i n a l i v i n g room, ten feet  apart, may be 'close' and, conversely, as H a l l himself points out, people packed into a bus are not necessarily Intimate.  The problem which H a l l  glosses over i s the d e f i n i t i o n of the s i t u a t i o n by the participants. H a l l does add a remark concerning his categorization of distances^  that  "how people are feeling toward each other at the time i s a decisive factor i n the distance used" (1966:100), but this statement would appear to be i n passing for he has to f i l e gross kinds of behaviour into h i s  categories.  The basis for Hall's s p a t i a l continuum (1966:118-119) i s a 'study' of non-contact, middle class, healthy adults, mainly natives of the ,:  67 northeastern seaboard of the United States" (1966:109).  The details as to  sampling and number of subjects, and research design are not c l e a r .  Hall  t e l l s us only that h i s generalizations were based on observations and 'neutral' interviews.  Although he says that h i s generalizations do not  represent a l l or even American behaviour—only  the group i n h i s sample-  he appears to forget this i n his discussions. To consider a c r i t i c i s m of a more serious nature regarding Hall's s p a t i a l model, information from stagings suggests that a t r i - p a r t i t e conception i s a more accurate model for proxemics than a four-part one.  Such  a tri-divdsion i s further supported by verbal expressions l i k e 'the eternal t r i a n g l e ' and 'The T r i n i t y ' .  I f we assume that dialogue and speech are  an a r t i c u l a t i o n of our conceptual repertoire, i t would appear more than accidental that there i s an underlying t r i - p a r t i t e organization which may be reflected i n non-verbal  forms of human expression, including s p a t i a l  patterns. Many of Hall's generalizations about proxemics are seemingly based on personal anecdotal experiences, such as h i s statement that Arabs crowd i n public places and do not recognize our private zone because to them "public i s p u b l i c " (1966:146).  Hall's experiences are c e r t a i n l y  fascinating and varied, but one i s susceptible to doubts about h i s characterizations of s p a t i a l patterns knowing that some of his conclusions are possibly based on a single or limited personal  encounter.  The four main labels for c l a s s i f y i n g variations i n distance patterns decided, H a l l writes that there are Intimate, Personal, Social and Public phases to personality,  the zones around man being extensions of  his personality, (1966:109; 121). These phases of personality Hall c a l l s  68 'situational'.  The jump from four kinds of spatial patterns to personality  is a b i g one which leaves the reader somewhat apprehensive of Hall's psychological e x p l i c a t i o n . H a l l expands proxemics to a point of being indicative of a l l that is cultural.  He writes that the study of proxemics leads us to "hidden  c u l t u r a l frames that determine  (writer's emphasis) the structure of a  given people's perceptual world"  (1966:153).  In the f i n a l chapter of Hidden Dimension,Hall emphasizes h i s position that a l l that man i s and does i s related to h i s experience of the phenomenon of space.  Human beings are multidimensional, i n the minds of  most investigators of s o c i a l behaviour, and i t seems less than equitable to reduce the many (and i t might be added—unstudied) dimension.  facets to a single  Proxemics, i t s e l f , i s multidimensional, as H a l l points out.  Nonetheless, there i s i n s u f f i c i e n t and imprecise evidence that proxemics, or any other body of theory, i s the elucidation of s o c i a l behaviour. In spite of the fact that H a l l outlines the purpose of h i s studies to be to "...show the reader that behind the apparent  mystery,  confusion and disorganization of l i f e there i s order" (1959:12), by providing the c u l t u r a l analogue of a musical primer, he has not succeeded i n adding to 'counterpoint' i n the way of methodology.  69  FOOTNOTES I am indebted  to Mr. C.J. Grant for this idea.  Moreover, not a l l students taking part i n the assignment considered a family quarrel as Intimate, a point which came out i n informal discussion x.'ith the students a f t e r the staging project had been completed. As well, two g i r l s stated that a gossip session to them was intimate. Intimate i s any face-to-face i n t e r a c t i o n occuring at less than a foot and a h a l f . "The s p e c i f i c distance chosen depends on the transaction; the relationship of the interacting i n d i v i d u a l s , how they f e e l , and what they are doing" (1966:120).  CHAPTER 6 POSSIBLE FIELD APPLICATION  Extending the major concern of the thesis, an exploration of the s p a t i a l dimension of s o c i a l interaction, i t i s intended i n this chapter to outline a framework for a f i e l d study of proxemic p a t t e r n s — a spatial ethnography.  I t w i l l be suggested i n some d e t a i l that an ethnographic  approach to the subject can be supplemented by serni-structured observation and the u t i l i z a t i o n of such records as  photographs.  The problem of an ethnographer w i l l be to study the s p a t i a l organization of a community, such as a v i l l a g e * , p a r t i c u l a r l y those features which H a l l c a l l s i n f o r m a l — l a r g e l y unstated distances "maintained i n encounters with others" (1966:105). Such a study of s p a t i a l r e g u l a r i t i e s i n behaviour would take into account a considerable number of factors i n social i n t e r a c t i o n . would include sex, generation and age, status and s i t u a t i o n .  These  Partially  covered by these would be considerations of such divisions as family/nonfamily, stranger/friend or work/non-work. To i l l u s t r a t e the complexity of any one of these factors, an examination of the relationship between s o c i a l and physical distance i n terms of status (and the companion q u e s t i o n — i f equality i s reflected by proximity) would lead to close analysis of i n t e r a c t i o n between persons of different status.  Could a typical deference distance be established , such  as a d i s t i n c t i v e s p a t i a l zone around important persons l i k e chiefs or leaders? Does this equal a leit-motiv? I f one established the fact that, for example,  70  71 as r e l a t i v e status d i f f e r e n t i a l increased so did the actual distance used i n interaction, changes i n distance patterns may be a clue to less than obvious status l e v e l s . It becomes apparent that i s o l a t i n g the s a l i e n t fundamentals  in  any s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n , and p a r t i c u l a r l y i n s p a t i a l arrangements, i s not a simple matter.  However, once there i s some understanding  of the components  of s o c i a l situations which a f f e c t or modify s p a t i a l relationships (and vice versa), analysis of v i l l a g e proxemic patterns can be widened.  Social  control, marriage patterns, v i o l a t i o n of norms, language, 'world view', the normative system, can serve as frameworks for queries of more general underl y i n g proxemic p r i n c i p l e s . Taking s o c i a l control as an example, what s p a t i a l concerns are applicable?  F i r s t , the common meanings of punishment, sanctions and rules  which are read into the term s o c i a l control may  include a spatial reference.  Distance i s d e l i b e r a t e l y used i n banishment, whether someone i s removed great distance from his v i l l a g e or put behind high walls within the community.  I f there are cases of banishment i n the v i l l a g e we are hypo-  t h e t i c a l l y studying, i s there, as w e l l , some kind of distance scale being used; for example, serious offenders being sent furthest from the v i l l a g e . And are 'far' and  'furthest' codified i n law i n terms of actual distance?  As noted i n chapter 2, a report by F i r t h (1959) on three cases of banishment i n Tikopia mentions that h a l f a mile seemed to be adequate distance for punishment. Less formal methods of using space as a sanction may operate, such as greater or lesser distance i n face-to-face interaction with a s o c i a l offender.  One  may  signal disapproval by changing normal distance patterns.  72 By checking out s o c i a l offenders one could ask i f they have a wider or narrower space bubble around them, not necessarily by choice, but because others demand greater distance as an expression of d i s a p p r o v a l — a scaled down ostracism.  A related question would be i f the offender  that he i s being  'kept at a distance  1  recognizes  as a punishment or sign of disappro-  val . To consider s o c i a l d i s c i p l i n e as the informal end of s o c i a l cont r o l , one can talk about 'owing' proper involvement, deportment and distance to others i n face-to-face s i t u a t i o n s — a kind of s o c i a l multiprocity which may  go on without  participants having conscious awareness of i t .  A thorough analysis of the complexities of the web  of s p a t i a l  patterns, some indicated above, could be expanded to a thesis i n i t s e l f . However, the major concern of thewriter i s with possible methods of getting at proxemic material, i n this case i n a v i l l a g e s i t u a t i o n .  In addition to  interviews and conversation, observations, a census and geneologies, suggested that semi-structured observations, maps, stagings and analysis may  i t is  vocabulary  provide data, either to check observation or to tap informa-  t i o n about s o c i a l situations which could not be d i r e c t l y  recorded.  Following the writer's use of a grid to measure distances between interacting persons, one could adapt such a scheme for use study.  i n the v i l l a g e  Rather than grids marked on floors one would prepare floor plans  of house i n t e r i o r s , establishing actual distances between boundaries such as house posts, walls and f u r n i t u r e . This accurately noted, one could use such diagrams to note distances between persons as they conducted routine activities.  In addition to simply noting s t a t i c positions such as  who  s i t s where, or the nature and use of various areas of the house (as was  73  done by Mead,1935; Firth,193S; Piddington, 1957-.498; Pierce,1964; Chapin, 1947), one could record changes and adjustments i n distances.  By keeping  regular and consistent s p a t i a l diaries of a c t i v i t i e s , one would have a large body of f a i r l y precise information to draw upon, rather than relying on impressionistic observations. Of course, there could be problems with such an approach.  To  people who would perhaps find note-taking an intrusion, a sheaf of recording sheets may be offensive.  Assuming that v i l l a g e r s were tolerant of the  ethnographer's peculiar habits, one could prepare recording sheets for any area of the v i l l a g e . A further method of observation, this time somewhat unplanned, could result simply from the fact that the ethnographer i s a stranger who w i l l no doubt v i o l a t e norms, including distance r e g u l a r i t i e s .  While  i t i s not recommended ithat deliberate experiments i n v i o l a t i o n of s p a t i a l manners be overdone i n any calculated fashion, cases of inadvertent trespassing which caused a reaction such as embarrassment, anger or silence, may  point to an unnoticed  pattern.  As the ethnographer's position i n the community changes from stranger to non-stranger,  are adjustemnts made i n distance by v i l l a g e r s ? ^  In addition to adapting a grid system for measuring distances, the staging design of the writer's project could be extended to the v i l l a g e situation, although c e r t a i n l y on a more informal b a s i s .  I f one could have  v i l l a g e r s act out various everyday situations^, one could (a) e s t a b l i s h i f such distance patterns were the same as observed of actual s o c i a l situations and  (b) have people act out situations which perhaps one could not observe,  such as family quarrels.  In regards to (a), i f one could legitimately argue  74  that distance patterns used i n stagings accurately paralleled those i n actual situations, one would have a useful and v a l i d means of quickly getting at a wide range of behaviour.  Stagings could thus be a quick way  of c o l l e c t i n g c r o s s - c u l t u r a l data on proxemics. A simpler v a r i a t i o n of stagings would be to ask v i l l a g e r s to place themselves i n the position they would normally be for various a c t i v i t i e s , which could include situations or a c t i v i t i e s which the ethnographer was not allowed to witness.  And, i f v i l l a g e r s could not block out such  positions,or refused to do so, this may be an i n d i c a t i o n of some perceptual pattern or rule of behaviour hitherto unnoticed by the ethnographer. Children could, as w e l l , be asked to act at various everyday a c t i v i t i e s which would be one way of finding out when children learn such implic i t codes of behaviour as distance patterns. i n stagings mimic those used by adults?  Do distances between children  Prior to such stagings, the  ethnographer would have presumably made observations of children's games and play which he could compare with adult a c t i v i t i e s i n terms of s p a t i a l arrangements. In b r i e f then, u t i l i z i n g stagings would get at two spheres of inquiry: 1.  Do portrayals of s o c i a l situations p a r a l l e l the actual, p a r t i c u l a r l y  i n regard to distance patterns? 2.  Do children use the same spacing patterns as adults and, i f not, when 5  do they learn such a 'code'? Another suggestion e a s i l y follows from actual s t a g i n g s — r a t h e r than people a c t u a l l y placing themselves i n positions, ask them to draw settings of persons i n various situations and to indicate \mo would be  75  where.  This could be done on the ethnographer's  recording sheets.  And  here, again, the ethnographer can t r y to get at any overt c o d i f i c a t i o n of distance rules by asking why arrangements would be drawn i n a particular way.  I t must be noted  here that there i s no a p r i o r i assumption that  drawings would accurately p a r a l l e l the ethnographer's situations,  observations of actual  but i f this did happen, drawings would be useful, at least when  compared to other kinds of data.  Indicating where people stand or s i t on  mimeographed sheets may be less than agreeable, or understandable, to v i l l a g e r s and could cause resentment.  I f v i l l a g e r s were not able or w i l -  l i n g to draw settings, this fact i s datum i n i t s e l f and may give a clue to s p a t i a l perceptions (or lack of them) or some norm i n v i l l a g e  life.  Furthermore, there i s a p o s s i b i l i t y of perceptual d i f f i c u l t y here—transposing a physical arrangement of persons i n an actual s o c i a l s i t u a t i o n to paper may be confusing or impossible for the v i l l a g e r s under study.  The mental dynamics of such a process are no doubt complicated. F a i r l y late i n the f i e l d study, asking v i l l a g e r s to plot  situa-  tions of t h e i r own choice on paper and having the ethnographer try to label what was being represented, would be a check on h i s grasp of spatial codes. Similar to both the staging approach and drawings, an adaptation of Horowitz' experiments with body-buffer zones (see chapter 2) i s another means of c o l l e c t i n g data. Remembering his design of having people approach either a person or object to the point where they no longer f e l t comfortable, one could have v i l l a g e r s do likewise. In spite of the fact that they may joke or laugh about such an 'assignment' they would s t i l l , as i n normal everyday situations, have to draw on some conceptual  'pool', which,  76 i t has been argued throughout the thesis, i s bounded and can be uncovered. The serai-structured experiment could be done i n much less formal fashion than Horov;itz--for example, casually asking someone to indicate hox-7 far he would stand from a particular person i n a conversation, then asking close or far one would be before the distance f e l t uncomfortable.  how  A basic  problem, however, would be for the ethnographer and v i l l a g e r to be using the same d e f i n i t i o n of 'uncomfortable'.  Assuming there were no problems  i n this regard, the ethnographer could c o l l e c t information on a v a r i e t y of patterns^ i n terms of the participants' subjective evaluation of what cons t i t u t e d usual and comfortable  spatial  boundaries.  A different approach to the c o l l e c t i o n of proxemic material would be to check v i l l a g e r ' s vocabulary s p a t i a l connotation.  This may  for terms r e f e r r i n g to space or having a  give the ethnographer an i n d i c a t i o n of the  depth of the s p a t i a l dimension involved i n his study.  Such a l i s t i n g  done by H a l l (1966:87) for English, revealed 5000 terns of this nature which, he notes, i s 207„ of the words i n the particular dictionary he surveyed. As well as simply l i s t i n g any distance or d:.stance-related words, one may  find a clue to spatial connotations of, for example, s o c i a l r e l a -  tionships.  Is there anything comparable to English reference to r e l a t i v e s  i n terms of 'distant' or 'close ? 1  As a f i n a l suggestion of methodological  approaches to a proxemic  study of a community, some consideration should be given to the use of photographic  records as a source of raw  data.  I f one had a large and representative p i c t o r i a l c o l l e c t i o n of various s o c i a l situations, an analysis of distance patterns could be done  77 at  leisure either by the ethnographer or by independent judges following  a notation system.  Such a system could be developed by the ethnographer  for his particular study, or adapt an already existing scheme, such as that of H a l l (1963) or Bales. A p i c t o r i a l analysis i n anthropology i s c e r t a i n l y not a new  idea.  Mead and IJeyman (1965), f o r example, presented a c r o s s - c u l t u r a l study i n the  form of photographs.  availability  One advantage of such a record, i s i t s permanent  for study after a return from the f i e l d .  In summary, t h i s chapter has t r i e d to indicate the p o t e n t i a l i t y of systematic f i e l d work i n proxemics by supplementing already established means of observation and interpretation of human behaviour with techniques developed i n the thesis project.  No claim i s made to covering a l l conceiv-  able methods of study; however, i t should be clear from the suggestions which have been put forward that there are a variety of p o s s i b i l i t i e s f o r research. It has been argued i n the thesis that since concepts about space •7 and distances vary among people , and i s r e f l e c t e d i n language, why should these not be observable i n actual ground patterns and s o c i a l interaction? Boundaries of t e r r i t o r y , property, s o c i a l relationships and modesty are considered by ethnographers--why interaction?  not the s p a t i a l boundaries to s o c i a l  Just because we cannot e a s i l y see such a perceptual repertoire  for the ordering of space does not cause behaviour patterns, i n t h i s case s p a t i a l , to grind to a h a l t ; nor should the e f f o r t s of s o c i a l s c i e n t i s t s to circumscribe and to make sense of r e g u l a r i t i e s i n space by obstructed by the  paucity of the t h e o r e t i c a l equipment.  Stagings and observations done  for the thesis, plus f l e e t i n g references i n the l i t e r a t u r e , convince the  78  writer that r e g u l a r i t i e s i n s p a t i a l patterns do exist, and can be d i r e c t l y studied, so why ignore them?  A systematic  study of proxemics could become  a legitimate area of research such as l i n g u i s t i c or kinship studies.  79 FOOTNOTES 1.  Taking, for present purposes, the d e f i n i t i o n of Notes and Queries "...a t e r r i t o r i a l l y separate c o l l e c t i o n of homesteads (a homestead being a single habitation the occupants of which form a household) which is regarded as a d i s t i n c t unit, and of such a size that i t s inhabitants can a l l be personally acquainted" (1951:64).  2.  E s s e n t i a l to such an argument i s the assumption that since status may be signalled by deportment, terms of address, gestures, and r i t u a l s , i t i s l i k e l y not isolated from distance patterns which are no less cues to s o c i a l r e l a t i o n s h i p s .  3.  The writer i s reminded of a conversation with an anthropologist doing f i e l d work i n a Hindu community and her comments of how physical proximity increased to the point of considerable discomfort on her part as the women came to define her as s i s t e r — t h e only c l a s s i f i c a t i o n the could assign to a woman who was obviously interested i n their way of l i f e and problems. By the end of the anthropologist's f i e l d study, i t was not uncommon for a Hindu woman to be s i t t i n g with her head on the anthropologist's shoulder.  4.  And one cannot assume that t h i s i s a legitimate request, for even though the high school students i n the writer's project had no d i f f i culty 'performing', persons i n another culture may not even be able to project behaviour from 'real' t o 'let's pretend'.  5.  And how do they learn? Are there deliberate instructions to children regarding space management? Or i s i n s t r u c t i o n less e x p l i c i t ; such as pushing a c h i l d away every time he i s closer than, say, three feet?  6.  Such as how far or close would a v i l l a g e r stand before he f e l t uneasy in such situations as the following: a conversation with a male f r i e n d , a female f r i e n d , conversation about children, or taboo subjects (would persons be further apart than usual, r e f l e c t i n g perhaps a sacred dimension to the conversation, or closer together--a protective distance for dealing with a dangerous t o p i c ) , appearing before a chief or other superior, giving orders. The v a r i e t y of situations is endless.  7.  For example, Andrews (1966), Levi-Strauss (1964).  BIBLIOGRAPHY  BIBLIOGRAPHY A l l e e , W.C. London.  1938.  The Social L i f e of Animals.  Um. Heinemann Ltd.,  Andrews, David H. 1966. The Conceptualization of Space i n Peru. Paper read at 65th Annual Meeting of American Anthropological Association, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania. Argyle, Michael & Dean, Janet. Sept. 1965. 'Eye-Contact, Distance and A f f i l i a t i o n ' . Sociometry. v o l . 28, no. 3, 209-304. Argyle, Michael. 1967. The Psychology of Interpersonal Behavior. Penguin Books, England. Bales, Robert F. 1949. A Set of Categories f o r the Analysis of Small Group Interaction (mimeo). Paper read at annual meerings of the American Sociological Society, N.Y. Barker, Roger G. & Louise S. 1961. 'Behavior Units f o r the Comparative Study of Cultures' (chapter 15) Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, ed. Bert Kaplan. Row, Peterson & Co., 111., pp. 457-476. Barker, R.oger G. 1963. Hew York, 1963.  The Stream of Behavior . Appleton-Century-Crof t s ,  Barnlund, Dean C. & Harland, C a r r o l l . 1963. as Determinants of Communication Networks' 467-479.  'Propinquity and Prestige Sociometry. v o l . 26,  Bass, Bernard M. & Klubeck, S. 1952. 'Effects of Seating on Leaderless Group Discussions' Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, v o l . 47, 724-727. Becker, Howard.  1956.  Berne, E r i c . 1949. v o l . 23, 203-226.  Man i n Reciprocity.  Frederick A. Praeger,  'The Nature of I n t u i t i o n  1  N.Y.  Psychiatric Quarterly,  Berne, E r i c . 1963. The Structure and Dynamics of Organizations and Groups. J.B. Lippincott Company, N.Y. Berne, E r i c .  1964.  Games People Play.  Grove Press, N.Y.  Berreman, Gerald D. 1962. Behind Many Masks. The Society f o r Applied Anthropology, Rand H a l l , Cornell University, Ithaca, N.Y. Berreman, Gerald D. C a l i f o r n i a Press.  1963.  Hindus of the Himalayas.  80  University of  81 B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1952. 'Body Motion Research and Interviewing' Human Organization, v o l . 11, no. 1, Spring, 37-38. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1959 (a). 'Contribution of L i n g u i s t i c - K i n e s i c Studies to the Understanding of Schizophrenia' Schizophrenia, ed. A l f r e d Auerback. The Ronald Press Company. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1959 (b) . 'The Frames i n the Communication Process'. The American Society of C l i n i c a l Hyponosis Annual S c i e n t i f i c Assembly, October 10 (mimeo). B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1961. 'Paralanguage: 25 Years After Sapir' Lectures on Experimental Psychiatry, ed. Henry W. Brosin. University of Pittsburgh Press, Pittsburgh, Pa. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1962. ' C r i t i c a l Moments i n the Psychiatric Interview' Research Approaches to a Psychiatric Problem, ed. Thomas T. Tourlentes. Grune and Stratton, 111. 179-188. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1963. VPGA, March 21 (mimeo).  'Communication on Purpose'  Keynote Address:  B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1964 (a). 'Body Behavior and Communication' International Encyclopedia of Social Sciences. December. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1964 (b). 'The T e r t i a r y Sexual Characteristics of Man: A Fundamental i n Human Communication' (mimeo). B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1965. 'Communication: Group Structure and Process' Pennsylvania Psychiatric Quarterly. Spring, 37-45. B i r d w h i s t e l l , Ray L. 1966. 'Some Relations Between American Kinesics and Spoken American English' Communication and Culture, ed. A l f r e d G. Smith. Holt Rinehart and Winston, New York, 182-187. Broom, Leonard & Selznick, P h i l i p . New York, (3rd e d i t i o n ) . Brown, Roger. New York.  1965.  1955.  Sociology.  Harper & Row,  Social Psychology (chapter 2). The Free Press,  Burns, Tom. 1958. 'The Forms of Conduct' American Journal of Psychotherapy, v o l . LXIV, no. 2, September, 137-151. Burns, Tom. 1953. 'Friends, Enemies and the P o l i t e F i c t i o n ' Sociological Review, v o l . 18, no. 6, 654-662 C a r r o l l , Lewis. 1939. The Complete Works of Lewis C a r r o l l . University Press, Glasgow.  American  London,  82  Chapin, F. Stuart. 1947. Experimental Designs i n Sociology Research. Harpers and Bros., New York, Chappie, E l i o t D. 1940. 'Measuring Human Relations: An Introduction to the Study of the Interaction of Individuals' General Psychology Monographs. v o l . 22, 3-142. Chappie, E l i o t D. 1942. 'Measurement of Interpersonal Behavior' Hew York Academy of Sciences - Transactions. Ser. 2, v o l . 4, no. 5, A p r i l 27, 222-234. Cherry, C o l i n . 1957. On Human Communication. of Technology, New York.  Massachusetts Institute  Crook, J.H. 1961. 'The Basic of Flock Organisation i n Birds' Current Problems i n Animal Behaviour, ed. U.H. Thorpe & O.R. Zangwill, Cambridge University Press, 125-149. d'Andrade, R.G. & Romney, K. 1964. 'Summary of Participants Discussion' (ethnoscience) American Anthropologist, v o l . 66, no. 3, du Bois, Cora. Minneapolis. Efron, David. New York.  1944. 1941.  Eichler, L i l l i a n . Co., New York,  The People of A l o r .  University of Minnesota Press,  Gestures and Environment.  1924.  Customs of Mankind.  King's Crown Press,  Gordon C i t y Publishing  F e l i p e , Nancy Jo & Sommer, Robert. 1966. .'Invasions of Personal Space' Social Problems, v o l . 14, no. 2, F a l l , 206-214. F i r t h , Raymond. London.  1936.  IJe the Tikopia.  George A l l e n & Unwin Ltd.,  F i r t h , Raymond.  1956,  Human Types.  F i r t h , Raymond. Ltd., London.  1959.  Social Change i n Tikopia.  Barnes and Noble Inc., New York. George A l l e n & Unwin  F i r t h , Raymond. 1964. Essays on Social Organization and Values. University of London, Athlone Press. Frake, Charles 0. Anthropologist.  1964. 'Notes on Queries i n Ethnography' v o l . 66, no. 3, June, 132-145.  Frank, Lawrence K. 1951. Press, New Jersey. Frum, Barbara. 1966. August, 75-76.  Nature and Human Nature.  American  Rutgers University  'The Hidden Language Your Family Speaks'  Chatelaine  33  Free, Anne R.  1960.  by a Gentleman. and Blanchard,  Social Usage.  Appleton-Century-Crofts,  1829. Advice to a Young Man Philadelphia.  Hew  York.  on Entering Society.  Lea  Garfinkel, Harold. 1963. 'Studies of the Routine Grounds of Everyday A c t i v i t i e s ' S o c i a l Problems. v o l . 11, no. 1, Summer, 225-250. Goffman, Erving. 1953. Communication Conduct i n an Island Community. Chicago, 111. (Ph.D. d i s s e r t i o n , microfilm). Goffman, Erving. 1955. 'On Face Work--An Analysis of R i t u a l Elements i n Social Interaction' Psychiatry, v o l . 18, 213-231. Goffman, Erving. 1956 (a). 'Embarrassment and Social Organization' American Journal of Sociology, v o l . 62, no. 1, 264-274. Goffman, Erving. 1956 (b). 'The Nature of Deference and Demeanor' American Anthropologist, v o l . 58, June^ 473-501. Goffman, Erving. 1957. v o l . 10, 47-60.  'Alienation from I n t e r a c t i o n  1  Human Relations,  Goffman, Erving. 1959. The Presentation of Self i n Everyday L i f e . Doubleday and Company Inc., New York. Goffman, Erving. Hew York.  1961  (a).  A.sylums.  Doubleday and Company Inc.,  Goffman, Erving. Indiana.  1961  (b).  Encounters.  Goffman, Erving. New York.  1963.  Bobbs-Merrill Company Inc.,  Behavior i n Public Places.  Goffman, Erving. 1964. 'The Neglected v o l . 66, no. 6, 133-136.  The Free Press,  Situation' American Anthropologist.  Goodenough, Ward H. 1964. 'Cultural Anthropology and L i n g u i s t i c s ' Language i n Culture and Society, ed. D e l l Hymes. Harper and Row, Hew York. Goodenough, Ward H. 1965. 'Rethinking Status and Role--Toward a General Model of the C u l t u r a l Organization of Social Relationships' The R.elevance of Models f o r S o c i a l Anthropology, ed. Michael Banton. Tavistock Publications, London. Gurvitch, Georges. Co., Holland.  1964.  Spectrum of S o c i a l Time.  D. Reidel Publishing  84 Gyr, John. 1951. 'Analysis of Committee Member Behavior i n Four Cultures' Human Relations, v o l . 4, 193-202. H a l l , Edward T. 1955. 'The Anthropology of Manners' American. A p r i l , 84-90. H a l l , Edward T. Conn.  1959. The Silent Language.  Scientific  Fawcett Publications,  H a l l , Edward T. 1960. 'The Silent Language i n Overseas Business' Harvard Business Review, v o l . 38, no. 1, 87-96. H a l l , Edward T. 1961. "The Language of Space' American I n s t i t u t e of Architects. February.  Journal of the  H a l l , Edward T. 1962 (a). "The Madding Crowd—Space and I t s Organizat i o n as a Factor i n Mental Health' Landscape. Autumn, 26-30. H a l l , Edward T. 1962 (b). 'Our Silent Language' no. 2, February, 5-8.  Americas,  v o l . 14,  H a l l , Edward T. 1963 (a). 'Quality i n Architecture: An Anthropolog i c a l View' Journal of the American Institute of Architects. July. H a l l , Edward T, 1963 (b). 'A System for the Notation of Proxemic Behavior' American Anthropologist, v o l . 65, no. 5, 1003-1026. H a l l , Edward T. 1964. 'Adumbration as a Feature of I n t e r c u l t u r a l Communication' American Anthropologist, v o l . 66, no. 6, 54-163. H a l l , Edward T. 1965. ' T e r r i t o r i a l Needs and Limits' December, 12-19.  Natural History  H a l l , Edward T. & Whyte, William Foote. 1966. 'Intercultural Communication: A Guide to Men of Action' Human Organization, v o l . 19, no. 1, Spring, 5-12. Hare, A. Paul & Bales, Robert F. 1963. 'Seating Position and Small Group Interaction' Sociometry v o l . 26, 480-486. Hediger, H. 1955. Studies of the Psychology and Behaviour of Captive Animals i n Zoos and Circuses. Butterworths S c i e n t i f i c Publications, London. Henry, William E. Inc., New York,  1956. The Analysis of Fantasy.  Horowitz, Mardi J . 1965. 'Human Spatial. Behavior' of Psychotherapy, v o l . 19, 20-28.  John Wiley and Sons American Journal  Horowitz, Mardi J., Duff, Donald F., Stratton, Lois 0. 1964. 'BodyBuffer Zone, Exploration of Personal Space' A.M.A. Archives of General Psychiatry, v o l . 11, 651-656.  85 Hymes, Dell H. 1962. 'The Ethnography of Speaking' Anthropology and Human Behavior. The Anthropological Society of Washington, Washington, D.C., 13-53. Hymes, Dell H. 1964. Language i n Culture and Society. Row, New York.  Harper and  Joos, Martin. 1962. "The Five Clocks' International Journal of American L i n g u i s t i c s , v o l . 28, no. 2, A p r i l , 1-62. Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1943. 'Covert Culture and Administrative Problems' American Anthropologist, v o l . 45, no. 2, 213-229. Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1953. 'The Concept of Culture i n Psychiatric Theory and Practice' Digest of Neurology & Psychiatry. Series XXI, A p r i l , 153. Kluckhohn, Clyde. 1954. 'Culture and Behavior' Handbook of Social Psychology, ed. Gardiner Lindsey, v o l . 2, Addison-Wesley Publishing Co., Inc., Mass., 921-976. Lantis, Margaret. 1960. 'Vernacular Culture' v o l . 62, no. 2, A p r i l , 202-216.  American Anthropologist.  Lerner, Daniel. 1958. The Passing of Traditional Society. Press, 111., pg. 24.  The Free  Lerner, Daniel. 1961. 'An American Researcher i n Paris: Interviewing Frenchmen Studying Personality Cross-Culturally, ed. Bert Kaplan. Row, Peterson & Co., New York, 427-442. 1  Levi-Strauss, Claude. Lewin, Kurt. New York.  1964. T r i s t e s Tropiques. Atheneum Pubs., N.Y.  1951. F i e l d Theory i n Social Science.  Lynes, Russell. New York.  1957. The Domesticated Americans.  Harper Bros.,  Harper and Row,  Mair, Lucy P. 1934. An African People i n the Twentieth Century. Routledge & Kegan Paul Ltd., London. Mead, George H. 1934. Mind, Self and Society. Press, Chicago.  University of Chicago  Mead, Margaret. 1935. Sex and Temperment i n Three Primitive Societies. Wm. Morrow & Co., New York.  86  Mead, Margaret. 1939. 'Coming o f Age i n Samoa* Um. Morrow & Co., New York. Mead, Margaret. New York.  From the South Seas.  1942. And Keep Your Powder Dry.  Wm. Morrow & Co.,  Mead, M a r g a r e t . 1958. ' C u l t u r a l Determinants o f B e h a v i o r ' B e h a v i o r and Evolution, e d . Anne Roe & G.G. Simpson, Y a l e U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Mead, Margaret & Macgregor, Frances Cooke. G.P. Putnam's Sons., New York. Mead, Margaret & Heyman, Ken.  1951. Growth and C u l t u r e .  1965. F a m i l y .  M a c m i l l a n Co., New York,  Mead, Margaret & W o l f e n s t e i n , Martha. 1955. C h i l d h o o d i n Contemporary C u l t u r e s . U n i v e r s i t y o f Chicago P r e s s . M i l l e r , D a n i e l R. 1961. ' P e r s o n a l i t y and S o c i a l I n t e r a c t i o n ' S t u d y i n g Personality Cross-Culturally, ed. B e r t K a p l a n . Row, P e t e r s o n & Co., 111. M i l l e r , Frank B. 1958. ' S i t u a t i o n a l I n t e r a c t i o n - A Worthwhile Human O r g a n i z a t i o n , v o l . 17, no. 4, 37-47. Murphy, Robert F. Anthropologist. Nadel, S.F. 111.  1964. ' S o c i a l D i s t a n c e and the V e i l ' American v o l . 66, no. 6, p a r t I , December, 1257-1274.  1951. Foundations o f S o c i a l A n t h r o p o l o g y .  Nicolson, Harold.  Concept?'  1956. Good B e h a v i o r .  The Free P r e s s ,  Doubleday & Co. I n c . , New York,  Nosanchuk, T.A. The Game o f Non M u s i c a l C h a i r s : A Q u e s t i o n n a i r e Approach to Proxemics, U n i v e r s i t y o f B.C. (mimeo). O l i v e r , Douglas. 1958. 'An Ethnographer's Method f o r F o r m u l a t i n g D e s c r i p t i o n s o f S o c i a l S t r u c t u r e ' American A n t h r o p o l o g i s t , v o l . 60, no. 2, 801-826. O r t e g a y G a s s e t , Jose. New York.  1957. Man and P e o p l e .  W.W.  Norton & Co., I n c . ,  P i d d i n g t o n , R a l p h . 1950. An I n t r o d u c t i o n t o S o c i a l Anthropology. O l i v e r and Boyd, London, v o l . 1. P i d d i n g t o n , Ralph. 1957. An I n t r o d u c t i o n to S o c i a l A n t h r o p o l o g y . O l i v e r and Boyd, London, v o l . 2.  87  P i e r c e , Joe E. 1964. L i f e i n a T u r k i s h V i l l a g e . Winston, New York.  H o l t , Rinehart  &  P i k e , Kenneth L . 1954. Language i n R e l a t i o n t o a U n i f i e d Theory o f the S t r u c t u r e o f Human B e h a v i o r . P a r t s I , I I , I I I . Summer I n s t i t u t e o f Linguistics, California. (2nd r e v i s e d e d i t i o n The Hague, Mouton, 1967) P i k e , Kenneth L . 1964. 'Towards a Theory o f the S t r u c t u r e o f Human B e h a v i o r ' Language i n C u l t u r e and S o c i e t y , ed. D e l l Hymes, Harper &. Row, New York. P i t t e n g e r , R.E., H o c k e t t , C.F. & Doneby, J . J . 1960. The F i r s t F i v e Minutes - A Sample o f M i c r o s c o p i c I n t e r v i e w A n a l y s i s . Paul M a r t i n e a u , New York. Post,  Emily.  1950. E t i q u e t t e .  Pringle, Gertrude. Toronto. Read, Kenneth E. New York.  Funk and Wagnall Co., New York.  1949. E t i q u e t t e i n Canada.  1965. The High V a l l e y .  McLelland  Charles  Scribner's  R e d f i e l d , Robert. 1941. The F o l k C u l t u r e o f Yucatan, Chicago Press, 111. Reimer, M o r r i s D. 1949. v o l . 23, 108-115.  'The Averted  Gaze'  Reimer, M o r r i s D. 1955. ' A b n o r m a l i t i e s Quarterly, v o l . 29, no. 1, 659-672.  & Stewart,  Sons,  University of  Psychiatric Quarterly,  o f the Gaze'  Psychiatric  Riesman, David, P o t t e r , R.J., Watson, Jeanne. 1960. ' S o c i a b i l i t y , Permissiveness and E q u a l i t y ' P s y c h i a t r y , v o l . 23, 323-340. Riesman, David, P o t t e r , R.J., Host' Human O r g a n i z a t i o n , Roosevelt, Eleanor. Co., New York.  Watson, Jeanne. 1960. v o l . 19, no. 1, 17-27.  'The V a n i s h i n g  1962. Book o f Common Sense E t i q u e t t e .  Ruesch, J u r g i n & Kees, Weldon. 1961. Nonverbal U n i v e r s i t y o f C a l i f o r n i a Press.  Macmillan  Communication.  Royal A n t h r o p o l o g i c a l I n s t i t u t e o f Great B r i t a i n and I r e l a n d . 1951. Notes and Q u e r i e s on A n t h r o p o l o g y . S i x t h e d i t i o n , Routledge and Kegan Paul L t d . , London. S a p i r , Edward. 1929. 'The Unconscious P a t t e r n i n g o f Behavior i n S o c i e t y ' The Unconscious - A Symposium, e d . C M . C h i l d , Kurt K a f f k a , John E . Anderson, e t a l . A l f r e d A. Knopf, New York, 114-142.  88  S a p i r , Edward. 1931. v o l . 4, 78-81. Schutz, A l f r e d . The Hague. S h e r i f , Muzafer. New York.  'Communication'  1964.  1936.  Encyclopedia o f Social Science,  C o l l e c t e d Papers,  v o l . I I , Martinus N i j h o f f ,  Psychology o f S o c i a l Norms.  Harper & Bros.,  Sommer, Robert & Ross, Hugo. 1958. ' S o c i a l I n t e r a c t i o n on a G e r i a t r i c s Ward' S o c i a l P s y c h i a t r y , v o l . 4, no. 1, Summer, 128-133. Sommer, Robert. 1959. no. 3, 247-260. Sommer, Robert.. 1961. v o l . 24, 99-110.  'Studies i n P e r s o n a l Space'  Sociometry.  'Leadership and Group Geography'  v o l . 22,  Sociometry.  Sommer, Robert. 1962. 'The D i s t a n c e f o r Comfortable C o n v e r s a t i o n : A F u r t h e r Study' Sociometry. v o l . 25, 111-115. Sommer, Robert. 1965. 'The S i g n i f i c a n c e o f Space' American I n s t i t u t e o f A r c h i t e c t s . May, 63-65.  J o u r n a l o f the  Sommer, Robert. 1965. ' F u r t h e r S t u d i e s o f Small Group E c o l o g y ' S o c i o metry. v o l . 20, no. 4, December, 337-348. Sommer, Robert. 1966. 'Man's Proximate Environment' I s s u e s , v o l . XXII, no. 4, 59-70. Sommer, Robert. 1967 ( a ) . v o l . 67, no. 2, 145-152.  'Small Group E c o l o g y '  Sommer, Robert. 1967 ( b ) . ' S o c i o f u g a l Space' S o c i o l o g y , v o l . 72, no. 6, May, 654-660.  Journal o f Social  Psychological  American  Bulletin,  Journal of  Steinzor, Bernard. 1950. 'The S p a t i a l F a c t o r i n Face to Face D i s c u s s i o n Groups' J o u r n a l o f Abnormal and S o c i a l Psychology, v o l . 45, 552-555. S t r a u s s , Anselm L .  1959.  M i r r o r s and Masks.  F r e e P r e s s , 111.  S t u r t e v a n t , W i l l i a m S. 1964. 'Studies i n E t h n o s c i e n c e ' A n t h r o p o l o g i s t . v o l . 66, no. 3, June, 99-131.  American  S u l l i v a n , H a r r y S t a c k . 1954. & Co. I n c . , New York.  W.W.  The P s y c h i a t r i c I n t e r v i e w .  Norton  89  Tonnies, Ferdinand. P r e s s , New York.  1961. Custom, An Essay on S o c i a l Codes.  Free  T u r n e r , Roy. 1966. Problems i n the Study o f I n t e r a c t i o n . Paper read at the P a c i f i c S o c i o l o g i c a l A s s o c i a t i o n Meetings, Vancouver, A p r i l 7. V a n d e r b i l t , Amy. 1953. Amy V a n d e r b i l t ' s Complete Book o f E t i q u e t t e . Doubleday & Co. Inc., New York. W a l l a c e , Anthony F.C. New York.  1961. C u l t u r e and P e r s o n a l i t y .  W a l l a c e , Anthony F.C. no. 3501, 351-357.  1962.  " C u l t u r e and C o g n i t i o n  1  Random House,  Science,  v o l . 135,  Warner, W. L l o y d & Lunt, Paul S. 1941. S o c i a l L i f e o f a Modern Community. Yale U n i v e r s i t y P r e s s . Watson, Jeanne & P o t t e r , R.J. 1962. 'An A n a l y t i c U n i t o f I n t e r a c t i o n ' Human R e l a t i o n s , v o l . 15, 245-263.  f o r the Study  Watson, 0. M i c h a e l & Graves, T.D. 1966. ' Q u a n t i t a t i v e Research i n Proxemic B e h a v i o r ' American A n t h r o p o l o g i s t , v o l . 68, no. 4, August, 971-985. Weybrew, Benjamin B. 1963. ' P s y c h o l o g i c a l Problems o f Prolonged Marine Submergence' Unusual Environments and Human B e h a v i o r , e d . Neal M. Burns, R.M. Chambers & E. H e n d l e r . F r e e P r e s s , 111. W i l s o n , Margery. New York.  1937. The New E t i q u e t t e .  F r e d e r i c k A. Stokes Co.,  Winnick, C h a r l e s & H o l t , H e r b e r t . 1961. 'Seating P o s i t i o n as Nonv e r b a l Communication i n Group A n a l y s i s ' P s y c h i a t r y , v o l . 24, 171-182. Wylie, Laurence. Press.  1957. V i l l a g e i n the V a u c l u s e .  Harvard U n i v e r s i t y  APPENDICES  APPENDIX A  ESSAY ASSIGNMENT  I n c o n j u n c t i o n w i t h v a r i o u s s t u d i e s b e i n g done a t the s c h o o l by a U.B.C. r e s e a r c h  team you are b e i n g asked to spend t h i s c l a s s p e r i o d  w r i t i n g down your ideas on the f o l l o w i n g t o p i c . T h i s essay to be graded.  Write  following points.  i s not an exam o r t e s t , o r something that i s going a paragraph  (or more i f you can) on each o f the  T r y to express your own views and not what you t h i n k  you ought t o s a y .  TOPIC  A.  B.  D e s c r i b e how you behave i n the f o l l o w i n g s i t u a t i o n s . (Behaviour i n t h i s case means what you do, not what you s a y ) . Give as d e t a i l e d a d e s c r i p t i o n as p o s s i b l e so t h a t a s t r a n g e r o f your age (say from another c o u n t r y ) c o u l d l e a r n how to f i t i n w i t h the group. 1.  T a l k i n g c a s u a l l y i n the h a l l  2.  An i n f o r m a l g e t - t o g e t h e r  at school  or p a r t y .  D e s c r i b e an o c c a s i o n where you f e l t out o f p l a c e w i t h a group o f f r i e n d s your age. Were you embarrassed? What do you t h i n k were the causes? How d i d you handle the s i t u a t i o n ?  90  APPENDIX B DIAGRAM OF STAGE PLAN  curtain 5' 12'  eage  of stage  12'  10'  camera--elev. 7 ' 7 " above sta^e l e v e l  observer-  91  APPENDIX C  SUMMARY OF DATA  Data c o l l e c t e d by the methods b r i e f l y o u t l i n e d included: of  quotes  minutes  (a) 354 essays  i n chapter 3  (b) 2000 q u e s t i o n n a i r e schedules  from e t i q u e t t e books  (c) 9 pages  (d) 55 s t a g i n g s o f a p p r o x i m a t e l y  two  each.  (a)  Of the essays submitted, 249 were perused i n a f i r s t  cull  i n f o r m a t i o n about  implicit  rules o f behaviour.  because o f i d e n t i f i c a t i o n d i f f i c u l t i e s , respondents  attempt to  105 were not used  the i n v e s t i g a t o r u s i n g names o f  t o a c q u i r e i n f o r m a t i o n from School r e c o r d s about  specifically,  sex, age and e t h n i c background.  the s t u d e n t s ;  I t was suspected when the  essay t o p i c was b e i n g formulated t h a t t h e r e would be d i f f e r e n c e s i n responses a c c o r d i n g t o c u l t u r a l background and s i n c e the School concerned had a l a r g e popuk t i o n o f s t u d e n t s o f non-Canadian origin-*- t h i s c o u l d be However, t h i s d i d not prove  to be so a f t e r essays had been examined.  One major t r e n d soon appeared not w r i t e about  checked.  non-verbal b e h a v i o u r  as essays were r e a d — s t u d e n t s d i d  (the major i n t e r e s t o f the i n v e s t i -  g a t o r ) but r a t h e r about what people say t o each o t h e r . The most f r e q u e n t comments or  i n the essays were " J u s t a c t n o r m a l l y "  " T a l k about..." which g i v e s no i n d i c a t i o n o f the i m p l i c i t  social  rules,  p a r t i c u l a r l y those h a v i n g to do w i t h s p a t i a l arrangements, which the i n v e s t i g a t o r was t r y i n g to t a p . (b)  From the 2000 q u e s t i o n n a i r e s c o l l e c t e d , 293 (the number  by the r e s e a r c h team) were r u n through  92  first  the prepared MV Tab computer  coded  93  program to get an i n d i c a t i o n o f p a t t e r n s o f r e s p o n s e s . apparent selves was  t h a t r e p l i e s t o the w r i t e r s ' q u e s t i o n s , and  quickly  the q u e s t i o n s them-  (a r e a l i z a t i o n which would have been obvious b e f o r e the q u e s t i o n n a i r e  a d m i n i s t e r e d had  the w r i t e r had  l e s s n a i v i t y about the meaning and  u t i l i t y o f q u e s t i o n s ) , would p r o v i d e minimal one  I t was  u s e f u l d a t a f o r how  a s c e r t a i n what i t means, f o r example, when 203  students agree  73 d i s a g r e e t h a t 'one must f o l l o w and b e l i e v e i n the r u l e s of Or t h a t embarrassment o c c u r s most f r e q u e n t l y (1) i n p u b l i c (2) b e i n g alone w i t h a f r i e n d o f the o p p o s i t e sex? approach need not waste our t i m e — l e t mation from the q u e s t i o n n a i r e was  does  conduct'?  places  The blemishes  i t be s u f f i c i e n t  and  o f the  t o say t h a t i n f o r -  not c o n s i d e r e d as d a t a f o r the w r i t e r ' s  e x p l o r a t i o n s o f s p a t i a l norms i n i n t e r a c t i o n .  (c)  The  next t a c k was  an a n a l y s i s o f popular e t i q u e t t e manuals to g i v e  some i n d i c a t i o n o f f o r m a l i z e d r u l e s o f space management but t h i s , was  not f r u i t f u l .  o f eye b e h a v i o u r , Wilson,  1939.  Although  t h e r e i s c o n s i d e r a b l e i n f o r m a t i o n about r u l e s  ( f o r example, Post, 1965:15; 1955:10.  V a n d e r b i l t , 1950.  Ortega y Gasset,  norms which a r e , n o n e t h e l e s s ,  (d)  We  patterns graphs,  " c e r t a i n mechanical  Pringle,  1957:116) and  c o n t a c t , any such d e t a i l e d commentary i s l a c k i n g when one  e s s e n t i a l to ease o f l i v i n g "  again,  1949. physical  considers s p a t i a l  conventions  t o be  observed,  (Post, 1955:2).  b e g i n t o get at such mechanical  conventions  concerning  spatial  upon a n a l y s i s o f d a t a from s t a g i n g s which i n c l u d e d 111 74 minutes 11 seconds o f tape, and  190  recording sheets.  photoDescrip-  t i o n and d i s c u s s i o n o f what o c c u r s s p a t i a l l y i n the s t a g i n g s w i l l be i n chapter 4, the f o l l o w i n g c h a p t e r d e a l i n g w i t h problems and about the nature o f the d a t a and  proxemic t h e o r y .  found  arguments  94  FOOTNOTE  E s t a b l i s h e d i n an e a r l i e r study (1966) by the w r i t e r about the r e l a t i o n s h i p o f o c c u p a t i o n a l g o a l s and e t h n i c background.  

Cite

Citation Scheme:

        

Citations by CSL (citeproc-js)

Usage Statistics

Share

Embed

Customize your widget with the following options, then copy and paste the code below into the HTML of your page to embed this item in your website.
                        
                            <div id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidgetDisplay">
                            <script id="ubcOpenCollectionsWidget"
                            src="{[{embed.src}]}"
                            data-item="{[{embed.item}]}"
                            data-collection="{[{embed.collection}]}"
                            data-metadata="{[{embed.showMetadata}]}"
                            data-width="{[{embed.width}]}"
                            async >
                            </script>
                            </div>
                        
                    
IIIF logo Our image viewer uses the IIIF 2.0 standard. To load this item in other compatible viewers, use this url:
http://iiif.library.ubc.ca/presentation/dsp.831.1-0104519/manifest

Comment

Related Items