Spatial distinctions by individuals seated in different arrangements are expanded using modified proxemic zones from previous research. The results are contrasted and compared with an overlay of Edward Hall's original proxemic zones on the same sets of data. It is suggested that the modified proxemic zones exhibit a greater degree of fidelity with the data and help to illuminate additional spatial distinctions made by people but that both sets of zones are important in spatial analysis and design. Research was conducted with scale–model environments (1“= 1'0”).
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BatesonG. (1974). Steps toward an ecology of mind. New York : Ballantine Press.
2.
de LongA. J. (1976a). Coding the environment. In PreiserW. F. E. [Ed.], Psyche and design. Orangeburg, NY : Association for the Study of Man–Environment Relations, pp. 33–45.
3.
de LongA. J. (1976b). The use of scale–models in spatial–behavioral research. Man-Environment Systems. 6, 179–182.
4.
DeLongA. J. (1977). The accuracy of spatial perception by informants in scale–model environments. Man-Environment Systems, 7, 55–58.
5.
de LongA. J. (1978). Proxemics and context: An empirical analysis. In RogersW. & IttelsonW. [Eds.], New directions in environmentalresearch. Washington, DC : Environmental Design Research Association, pp. 348–364.
6.
HallE. T. (1968). Proxemics. Current Anthropology, 9, No. 2–3, 83–108.
7.
LibertoD. (1990). Proxemic zones and the spatial organization of the micro–environment. Master's thesis. University of Tennessee, College of Human Ecology.
8.
PaneroJ., & ZelnikM. (1979). Human dimension and interior space. London : Architectural Press.
