How the spatial organization of the therapist office affects outcome is overlooked. The theoretical groundwork for conceptualizing in this area and the minimal pertinent research data are discussed. Questions are raised about the awareness of therapists regarding this variable.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BroekmannN.MollerA.Preferred seating positions and distance in various situations. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1973, 20, 504–508.
2.
HaaseR. F.The relationship of sex and instructional set to the regulation of interpersonal interaction distance in counseling analogue. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1970, 17, 233–236.
3.
HaaseR. F.Di MattiaD. J.Proxemic behavior: Counselor, administrator and client preference for seating arrangement in dyadic interaction. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1970, 17, 319–325.
4.
HallE. F.The silent language. New York: Doubleday, 1959.
5.
HallE. F.The hidden dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1966.
6.
HorowitzM. J.DuffD. F.StrattonL. O.Body buffer zone: An exploration of personal space. Archives of General Psychology, 1964, 11, 651–656.
7.
KinzelA. F.Body buffer zone in violent prisoners. American Journal of Psychology, 1976, 23, 13–16.
8.
LeipoldW. D.Psychological distance in a dyadic interview. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Univer. of North Dakota, 1963.
9.
LittleK. B.Personal space. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 237–247.
10.
OsmondH.Function as a basis of psychiatric ward design. Mental Hospitals, 1957, 8, 23–29.
11.
SommerR.Studies in personal space. Sociometry, 1959, 22, 247–260.
12.
SommerR.Personal space. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1969.
13.
WidgeryR.StackpoleC.Desk position, interviewee anxiety and interviewer credibility: An example of cognitive balance in dyad. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 1972, 19, 173–177.
