Does close distance increase liking for a social object? In a preliminary sociogram task, an association between proximity and intimacy was found in drawings of self and others. In three experimental studies, male participants consistently preferred female targets who were (actually or appeared to be) close than far from them. Distance was manipulated through various means—sitting distance (Study 2), presenting two facial images separately to each eye by a stereoscopic device (Study 3), or a video clip (Study 4). This effect was stronger among those with deprived social needs and occurred in part because close (vs. far) targets seemed psychologically more accessible to the perceiver. Our findings offer rare experimental evidence for the empirically challenged propinquity effect and provide new insights on how distance shapes inner experience.
AlterA. L.BalcetisE. (2011). Fondness makes the distance grow shorter: Desired locations seem closer because they seem more vivid. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 16-21.
2.
AlterA. L.OppenheimerD. M. (2008). Effects of fluency on psychological distance and mental construal (or why New York is a large city, but New York is a civilized jungle). Psychological Science, 19, 161-167.
3.
AronA.AronE. N.SmollanD. (1992). Inclusion of other in the self scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596-612.
4.
BalcetisE. (2016). Approach and avoidance as organizing structures for motivated distance perception. Emotion Review, 8, 115-128.
5.
BalcetisE.DunningD. (2010). Wishful seeing: More desired objects are seen as closer. Psychological Science, 21, 147-152.
6.
BaumeisterR. F.LearyM. R. (1995). The need to belong: Desire for interpersonal attachments as a fundamental human motivation. Psychological Bulletin, 117, 497-529.
7.
BossardJ. H. (1932). Residential propinquity as a factor in marriage selection. American Journal of Sociology, 38, 219-224.
8.
BrainardD. H. (1997). The psychophysics toolbox. Spatial Vision, 10, 433-436.
9.
BussD. M. (1988). The evolution of human intrasexual competition: Tactics of mate attraction. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 616-628.
10.
BussD. M.SchmittD. P. (1993). Sexual strategies theory: An evolutionary perspective on human mating. Psychological Review, 100, 204-232.
11.
CarterT. J.GilovichT. (2012). I am what I do, not what I have: The differential centrality of experiential and material purchases to the self. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 1304-1317.
12.
ClarkR. D.HatfieldE. (1989). Gender differences in receptivity to sexual offers. Journal of Psychology and Human Sexuality, 2, 39-55.
13.
CloreG. L.StorbeckJ. (2006). Affect as information about liking, efficacy, and importance. In ForgasJ. (Ed.), Affect in social thinking and behavior (pp. 123-142). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
14.
CosmidesL.ToobyJ. (2000). Evolutionary psychology and the emotions. In LewisM.Haviland-JonesJ. M. (Eds.), Handbook of emotions (2nd ed., pp. 91-115). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
15.
CramerK. M.BarryJ. E. (1999). Conceptualizations and measures of loneliness: A comparison of subscales. Personality and Individual Differences, 27, 491-502.
16.
FaulF.ErdfelderE.LangA. G.BuchnerA. (2007). G* Power 3: A flexible statistical power analysis program for the social, behavioral, and biomedical sciences. Behavior Research Methods, 39, 175-191.
17.
FenskeM. J.RaymondJ. E. (2006). Affective influences of selective attention. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 312-316.
18.
FestingerL.SchachterS.BackK. (1950). Social pressures in informal groups. New York, NY: Harper.
19.
FisherJ. D.RyttingM.HeslinR. (1976). Hands touching hands: Affective and evaluative effects of an interpersonal touch. Sociometry, 39, 416-421.
20.
FoleyJ. M. (1980). Binocular distance perception. Psychological Review, 87, 411-434.
21.
HallE. T. (1966). The hidden dimension. New York, NY: Doubleday.
22.
HaseltonM. G.NettleD. (2006). The paranoid optimist: An integrative evolutionary model of cognitive biases. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 10, 47-66.
23.
HseeC. K.TuY.LuZ. Y.RuanB. (2014). Approach aversion: Negative hedonic reactions toward approaching stimuli. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 699-712.
24.
IjzermanH.SeminG. R. (2010). Temperature perceptions as a ground for social proximity. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 46, 867-873.
25.
JostmannN. B.LakensD.SchubertT. W. (2009). Weight as an embodiment of importance. Psychological Science, 20, 1169-1174.
26.
KnowlesM. L.GreenA.WeidelA. (2013). Social rejection biases estimates of interpersonal distance. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 158-167.
27.
KurzbanR. (2001). The social psychophysics of cooperation: Nonverbal communication in a public goods game. Journal of Nonverbal Behavior, 25, 241-259.
28.
LiY. J.KenrickD. T.GriskeviciusV.NeubergS. L. (2012). Economic decision biases and fundamental motivations: How mating and self-protection alter loss aversion. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 550-561.
29.
MeierB. P.MoellerS. K.Riemer-PeltzM.RobinsonM. D. (2012). Sweet taste preferences and experiences predict prosocial inferences, personalities, and behaviors. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 102, 163-174.
30.
MillerG. F. (2000). The mating mind: How sexual selection shaped the evolution of human nature. New York, NY: Doubleday.
31.
MillerS. L.ManerJ. K. (2011). Ovulation as a male mating prime: Subtle signs of women’s fertility influence men’s mating cognition and behavior. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 100, 295-308.
32.
NeelR.KenrickD. T.WhiteA. E.NeubergS. L. (2016). Individual differences in fundamental social motives. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 110, 887-907.
33.
NeeseR. M.EllsworthP. C. (2009). Evolution, emotions, and emotional disorders. American Psychologist, 64, 129-139.
34.
PinquartM.SorensenS. (2001). Influences on loneliness in older adults: A meta-analysis. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 23, 245-266.
35.
PittsS.WilsonJ. P.HugenbergK. (2014). When one is ostracized, others loom: Social rejection makes other people appear closer. Social Psychological and Personality Science, 5, 550-557.
36.
PreacherK. J.HayesA. F. (2008). Asymptotic and resampling strategies for assessing and comparing indirect effects in multiple mediator models. Behavior Research Methods, 40, 879-891.
37.
ProffittD. R. (2006). Distance perception. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 15, 131-135.
38.
SchnallS.ZadraJ. R.ProffittD. R. (2010). Direct evidence for the economy of action: Glucose and the perception of geographical slant. Perception, 39, 464-482.
39.
SealsJ.CroftsD. (1976). Get closer. On Get Closer [CD]. California, United States: Warner Brothers Records.
40.
SegerC. R.SmithE. R.PercyE. J.ConreyF. R. (2014). Reach out and reduce prejudice: The impact of interpersonal touch on intergroup liking. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 36, 51-58.
41.
StelM.KoningsbruggenG. M. (2015). I need you closer to me: Effects of affiliation goals on perceptions of interpersonal distance. European Journal of Social Psychology, 45, 742-753.
42.
Touré-TilleryM.FishbachA. (2017). Too far to help: The effect of perceived distance on the expected impact and likelihood of charitable action. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 112, 860-876.
43.
TriversR. L. (1972). Parental investment and sexual selection. In CampbellB. (Ed.), Sexual selection and the descent of man (pp. 136-179). Chicago, IL: Aldine-Atherton.
44.
TropeY.LibermanN. (2010). Construal-level theory of psychological distance. Psychological Review, 117, 440-463.
45.
VeltkampM.AartsH.CustersR. (2008). Perception in the service of goal pursuit: Motivation to attain goals enhances the perceived size of goal-instrumental objects. Social Cognition, 26, 720-736.
46.
WatsonD.ClarkL. A.TellegenA. (1988). Development and validation of brief measures of positive and negative affect: The PANAS scales. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 54, 1063-1070.
YanD. (2014). Future events are far away: Exploring the distance-on-distance effect. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 106, 514-525.
49.
ZajoncR. B. (2001). Mere exposure: A gateway to the subliminal. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 10, 224-228.
Supplementary Material
Please find the following supplemental material available below.
For Open Access articles published under a Creative Commons License, all supplemental material carries the same license as the article it is associated with.
For non-Open Access articles published, all supplemental material carries a non-exclusive license, and permission requests for re-use of supplemental material or any part of supplemental material shall be sent directly to the copyright owner as specified in the copyright notice associated with the article.
