Skip to main content
Log in

Personal space: Understanding the simplex model

  • Published:
Journal of Nonverbal Behavior Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Hayduk (1985) investigated the ability of two models to account for a series of stop-distance measurements of personal space preferences. The repeated failure of the factor model implied that it was incorrect to interpret the multiple stop-distance measurements as reflecting a single, stable underlying characteristic called one's personal space preference. The success of the simplex model (a linear sequence of effects) indicated that personal space must be viewed instead as dynamic, which is in accord with the view that spatial preferences are situation dependent. The difficulty with the simplex model is that it is so sparse. Beyond its assertion of momentary expansions and contractions in spacing preferences, it seems to provide almost no theoretical flexibility. This paper demonstrates a range of theoretical styles (models) that are consistent with the simplex model, and hence documents a variety of theoretical and interpretational options that remain available to personal space researchers. Selecting among these conceptualizations of personal space will require further experimental investigations because all the equivalent optional models fit the current data equally well. Patterson's (1976) arousal attribution theory is used to illustrate how a theory postulating feedback loops might be consistent with the non-looped simplex model. Some intriguing parallels between these loop models and human physiology are also noted.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965). Eye-contact, distance, and affiliation.Sociometry, 28, 289–304.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayduk, L. A. (1981). The shape of personal space: An experimental investigation.Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 13, 87–93.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayduk, L. A. (1985). Personal space: The conceptual and measurement implications of structural equation models.Canadian Journal of Behavioural Science, 17, 140–149.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hayduk, L. A. (1987).Structural equation modeling with LISREL: Essentials and advances. Baltimore: The Johns Hopkins University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jöreskog, K., & Sörbom, D. (1984).LISREL-VI users' guide: Analysis of linear structural relationships by the method of maximum likelihood. Morresville, IN: Scientific Software, Inc.

    Google Scholar 

  • Kandel, E. R., Schwartz, J. H., & Jessell, T. M. (1991).Principles of neural science (3rd ed.). New York: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Knowles, E. S. (1980). An affiliative conflict theory of personal and group spatial behavior. In P. B. Paulus (Ed.),Psychology of group influence (pp. 133–188). Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. L. (1976). An arousal model of interpersonal intimacy.Psychological Review, 83, 235–245.

    Google Scholar 

  • Patterson, M. L. (1982). A sequential functional model of nonverbal exchange.Psychological Review, 89, 231–249.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Additional information

I thank Frank Grigel, Micheal Morrill, and two reviewers for their comments on drafts of this paper. The University of Alberta, Department of Sociology generously supported the reported computer runs.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Hayduk, L.A. Personal space: Understanding the simplex model. J Nonverbal Behav 18, 245–260 (1994). https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02170028

Download citation

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02170028

Keywords

Navigation