How close is too close? A comparison of proxemic reactions of Singaporean Chinese to male intruders of four ethnicities

Perceptual and Motor Skills

Volumn 93, Issue 1, 2001, Pages 124-126

  Li, Shu ^a  

^a NANYANG TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY   (Singapore)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ADULT; ARTICLE; BEHAVIOR; CHINA; CULTURAL ANTHROPOLOGY; DISTANCE PERCEPTION; ETHNIC GROUP; ETHNOLOGY; FEMALE; HUMAN; MALE; SINGAPORE;

ADULT; CHINA; CULTURE; DISTANCE PERCEPTION; ETHNIC GROUPS; FEMALE; HUMANS; MALE; SINGAPORE; SPATIAL BEHAVIOR;

EID: 0035431810     PISSN: 00315125     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.2466/pms.2001.93.1.124     Document Type: Article

References (9)

1. BULLOCK, M. I. (1974) The determination of functional arm reach boundaries for operation of manual controls. Ergonomics, 17, 375-388.
2. GIFFORD, R. (1982) Projected interpersonal distance and orientation choices: personality, sex, and social situation. Social Psychology Quarterly, 45, 145-152.
3. HALL, E. T. (1966) The hidden dimension. New York: Doubleday.
4. KING, B. G., MORROW D. J., & VOLLMER, E. P. (1947) Cockpit studies - the boundaries of the maximum are of the operation of manual controls. (Project X-651, Report 3), Bethesda, MD: Naval Medical Research Institute.
5. Li, S., & Xi, Z. (1990) The measurement of functional arm reach envelopes for young Chinese males. Ergonomics, 33, 967-978.
6. LITTLE, K. B. (1968) Cultural variations in social schemata. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 10, 1-7.
7. MURPHY-BERMAN, V., & BERMAN, J. (1978) Importance of choice and sex invasions of personal space. Personal and Social Psychology Bulletin, 4, 424-428.
8. NOWAK, E. W. R. (1978) Determination of the spatial reach area of the arm for workspace design purpose. Ergonomics, 21, 493-507.
9. REMLAND M. S., JONES, T. S., & BRINKMAN, H. (1995) Interpersonal distance, body orientation, and touch: effects of culture, gender, and age. Journal of Social Psychology, 135, 281-297.