Perceptual and Motor Skills, 1979,48, 299-308.
@ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1979
AN EXPLORATION OF PERCEPTION OF BODY BOUNDARY, PERSONAL SPACE, AND BODY SIZE I N ELDERLY PERSONS JOHN R. PHILLIPS
New York Uniuerrityl Stmmary.-A study of 108 elderly persons using the Body Distortion Questionnaire and the personal space simulation technique test did not support hypotheses that elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger distortion of body boundary, a larger perception of large body size, a smaller perception of small body size, a larger distortion of body size, and a larger body distortion than elderly persons with a small personal space. The analyses with one-tail t tests showed elderly persons with a small personal space have a larger perception of large body size and a larger distortion of body size than elderly persons with a large personal space. When the extremes of personal space were used the results were the same. Males have a larger personal space and greater distortion of skin perceptions than females.
The present study investigated the relationship between perceptions of body boundary, personal space, and body size of elderly persons. Fisher (1973, p. ix) points out "all that you perceive, think, and believe occurs in the context of your body experiences." Fisher and Cleveland (1968) state a child has the tendency to experience his body boundary as encompassing an area interior to the actual body wall and as he gtows the boundary approaches the body surface; it is the adult who has a regular contour of his boundary which does not adhere strictly to the surface of the body wall. "When the individual reaches a stage of advanced aging and experiences unpleasant changes in his appeatance and a decline in body sensitivity, his body-image boundaries again retreat to more interior sites" (Fisher & Cleveland, 1968, p. 348). Fisher (1970) suggests that the amount of distance a person places between himself and others may reflect how s e m e he feels about his boundary. A schizophrenic's perception of a diffused body boundary results in feelings of being "spread out" and large (Cleveland & Morton, 1962) and schizophrenics react to events at some distance as if they ate direct attacks upon their bodies (Fisher & Cleveland, 1968). Personal space characterizes the distance individuals prefer to maintain between themselves and others. Townsend (1973) postulated that the process of distancing (distance between self and an object) is a means by which the aged decrease sensory input which is anixery-producing and with which they are no longer able to cope. Little (1965) found that close friends approach each other more closely than they do with strangers, and Guardo and Meisels (1971) found that children placed figures labeled as suangers farther apart '245 East 24th Street, Apt.
7E, New York, New York 10010.
300
J. R. PHILLIPS
than figures which represented friends or persons who liked them. There is greater definiteness of personal space as children become older (Meisels & Guardo, 1969; Estes & Rush, 1971; Koslin, et al., 1971) and it is not until adolescence that personal space is developed enough to characterize a variety of situations (Alunan, 1975). In considering the development of personal space, Simpson and McKinney ( 1966) state life-space is constricted in childhood, expands during early adulthood and eventually constricts in late middle age. As a person moves through his life cycle changes occur in his sense of self which encompasses perceptions of body size. Schnall (cited by Wapner, 1960; Fisher, 1970) found that subjects placed in a "Lilliputian" room (lowered ceiling and miniature furniture) reported a sense of increased body size as evidenced by changes in perceived arm length. Fisher (1970) postulated that, since enhancing the boundary of a body area decreases its apparent size, it would be expected that persons with vague boundaries might perceive their bodies as larger than those whose boundaries are well articulated. Liebert, et al. (1958) found when definiteness of body boundaries was reduced by LSD there was a perceived increase in the size of the body. Wapner (1960) in a study involving subjects ranging in age from 4 through 25 yr. predicted children would overestimate head size more than adults because they have a less definite body boundary. All ages had a marked overestimation, but the overestimation was the greatest for younger children. Woods ( 1966), using estimations of body size from boys and girls at ages 8, 10, and 12 yr., found that those children with more definite body boundaries were less likely to overestimate head size. From the review of the literature it was indicated a person's perception of his body boundary and its relationship to the environment are involved in his development and the perception a person has of his personal space is involved in this process. The perception a person has of the size of his body is influenced by the sense he has of his body boundary as he interacts with the environment. The interaction a person has with his environment is regulated to some degree by the amount of personal space he desires when he comes in contact with others. This research employs four definitions: Personal Space: The distance an individual prefers between himself and others for comforrable conversation as evidenced by the distance between the subject's free-placement of two figures o n a board (Hall. 1966; Altman. 1 9 7 5 ) . Body Boundary Distortion: The subject's perception of the demarcation of his body from the environment as measured by the Body Distortion Questionnaire (Fisher. 1 9 7 0 ) . Body Size: The subject's perception of the size of his body as being either large or small as measured by the Body Distortion Questionnaire (Fisher, 1 9 7 0 ) . Body size
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
301
distortion is the combined score of a person's perception of his body as being large and small. Body Distortion: The perception a person has of his body in all of the categories measured by the Body Distortion Questionnaire (Fisher, 1970).
The hypotheses tested are: (1) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger distortion of body boundary than those with a small personal space; ( 2 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger perception of large body size than those with a small personal space; ( 3 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a smaller perception of small body size than those with a small personal space; ( 4 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger distortion of body size than those with a small personal space; and ( 5 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger body distortion than those with a small personal space.
METHOD subject^ The sample was composed of 108 elderly persons (54 men and 54 women) who were paid volunteers recruited from senior citizens centers in a large metropolitan area (New York City). The mean age of the sample was 69.7 yr., with a range of 60 to 87 yr. The subjects were limited to American-born 1966). All subpersons since personal space is influenced by culture (Hall, jects had to be able to read and write English since research tools required these attributes. The sample was divided at the median of the personal space scores to give a group of 54 subjects with a small personal space and having a mean of .59 mm with a range of .10 mm to 3.50 mrn and a group of 54 subjects with a large personal space with a mean of 9.0 mm and having a range of '3.60 mm to 34.30 mm. Instsuments Personal space stnzalation test.-An adaptation of the simulation technique test to measure personal space developed by Kuethe (1962a, 1962b) was used. This adaptation known as the free-placement technique (Altman, 1975) is similar to that used by Gioiella (1977). The test requires a board 18 X 18 in., covered with grey felt; this is placed before the subject on a table. There are two 4 m m black felt, circular figures which represent the subject and a casual acquaintance. The directions are: "Here is a figure which represents you. Place it on the board. Here is another figure which represents a casual acquaintance. Place this figure on the board at a distance from the figure representing you that is comfortable for conversation." Gottheil, et al. (1968) assessed the validity of this type of test in a study in which physical distance and social distance were measured directly and with the silhouette method, respectively. The direct measurement of physical distance
302
J. R. PHILLIPS
used a camera through a one-way mirror photographing the distance chosen by the subject. Later the subject was asked to represent the same situation by moving pieces on a board. A correlation coefficient of 0.40 for the two measurements was obtained ( p < 0.01). (1970) devised this test to find Body Distortion Questionnaire.-Fisher out if there are unique kinds of distorted body experiences which are associated with disturbances in reality testing. The subject answers "Yes," "No," or "Undecided" to 82 statements which refer to different kinds of distorted body experience. There are seven categories. These categories with examples are: ( 1) large-perception of body as large ("My hands feel big"), ( 2 ) smallperception of body as small ("My arms feel short"), ( 3 ) boundary loss-loss of body boundaries ("I feel like my body is unprotected"), ( 4 ) dirty-body dirty or contaminated ("I feel like I should wash my hands"), ( 5 ) blocked openings-blocking of body openings ("My ears feel stopped up"), (6) skinunusual skin sensations ("My skin feels tighter than usual"), and ( 7 ) depersondization-perception of one's body as alien or foreign ("My hands feel like they are not mine") (Fisher, 1970). A total body distortion score is obtained by adding the number of items in the questionnaire checked either "Yes" or "Undecided." In addition, a percentage representation of the seven subcategories can be obtained by taking the number of items checked "Yes" or "Undecided" for each category and dividing it by the total number of items checked "Yes" or "Undecided" in all categories. Percentage scores minimize the effects upon the specific categories of subject's general tendency to check either large or small number of items (Fisher, 1970). Fisher reports that the test-retest reliability of the total body distortion score has been consistently moderate to high (test-retest coefficients of .81 to 9 5 ) for normal subjects, but the test-retest reliabilities were considerably lower for the seven subcategory scores. Procedure Each subject was greeted and was told the investigator was interested in gathering information about elderly persons' perceptions for a research project. After permission was obtained, a Personal Data Sheet which asked for age, sex, and place of birth was completed. The distortion questionnaire was then answered and was followed with the personal space simulation technique test. The distance berween the two figures of the personal space test was measured with a millimeter ruler by the investigator and recorded on the Personal Data Sheet.
RESULTS Scores on the questionnaire and personal space test collected from 108 elderly persons ( 5 4 males and 54 females) were used to test the hypotheses
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
303
by one-tail t tests. Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations for the bariables in the analyses. None of the hypotheses as predicted were supported by the analyses. Hypothesis 1 which predicted that elderly persons with a large personal space would have a larger distortion of body boundary than those with a small personal space fell just below significance in the opposite direction ( t = 1.50, p = .068). Hypothesis 2 which stated that elderly persons with a large petsonal space would have a larger perception of large body size than those with a small personal space was significant (t = 1.84, 9 = .034) in the opposite direction to that predicted. Hypothesis 4 which stated that elderly persons with a large personal space would have a larger distortion of body size than elderly persons with a small personal space was also significant ( t = 1.92; p = .029) in the direction opposite to re diction. One-way t tests for the means for the categories of blocked opening, skin, dirt, and depersonalization of the questionnaire for elderly persons with small personal space and for elderly persons with large personal space were not significant ( p > 0.05). TABLE 1
MEANAND STANDARDDEVIATION FOR CATEGOR~ES OF BODYD T S T O R ~ O N QUESTIONNAIRE AND BODYSIZE DISTORT'ION FOR ELDERLY PERSONS WITH SMALLPERSONAL SPACEAND LARGEPERSONAL SPACE Variables
Small Personal Space M SD
Large Personal Space M SD
t
Body Distortion Large Body Size Small Body Size Body Size Distortion Body Boundary Distortion Blocked Openings Skin Dirt
Depersonalization " p < .05. Since the scores on the personal space test clustering around the median showed only a small variation the extremes were used to test the hypotheses. The lowest 40 scores were used for small personal space (mean = 1.04 mm; range = 0.10 mm to 2.10 mm) and the highest 40 scores were used for large personal space (M = 13.35 mm; range = 6.00 mm to 34.30 mm). This eliminated the middle 28 scores on the personal space test. The mean and standard deviation for these two extreme groups are shown in Table 2. None of the hypotheses using the means for the extremes of personal space were supported as predicted. However, Hypothesis 2 ( t = 2.28, p = .013)
J. R. PHILLIPS
TABLE 2 MEANAND STANDARDDEVIATIONFOR T H E CATEGORIES OF BODYDISTORTION QuESTIONNA~RE AND BODYSIZE DISTORTION FOR ELDERLY PERSONS WITH EXTREMES OF SMALL PERSONAL SPACEAND LARGEPERSONAL SPACE Variables
Extremes of Small Personal Space M
SD
Extremes of Large Personal Space M
f
SD
Body Distortion Large Body Size Small Body Size Body Size Distortion Body Boundary Distortion Blodred Openings Skin
Dirt
Depersonalization * p < .05. and Hypothesis 4 (t = 2.29, p = .013) were again significant in the opposite direction to prediction. The categories of blocked openings, skin, dirt, and depersonalization of the questionnaire were again nonsignificant. The sample of 108 elderly persons was divided into men (age mean = 68.85 yr.; range 60 to 86) and women (age mean = 70.55 yr.; range 60 to 87) with 54 subjects in each group. Table 3 gives the means and standard deviations for personal space, categories of the questionnaire, and body size distortion for elderly male and female persons. Male subjects had a larger personal space than female subjects ( t = 1.84, p = .034). None of the other TABLE 3 MEANSAND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR PERSONAL SPACE,CATEGORIES OF BODYDISTORTION QuESTIONNATRE,AND BODYSIZEDISTORTION FOR FEMALE AND h U L E ELDERLY PERSONS Male
Variables M Personal Space Body Distortion Large Body Size Small Body Size Body Size Distortion Body Boundary Distortion Blocked Openings Skin Dirt Depersonalization * p < .05. t p < .01.
SD
Female M SD
f
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
305
comparisons were significant except for skin where males had a larger distortion than females ( t = 2.60, p = .006). The comparison of depersonalization for males and females was not quite significant ( t = 1.63, p = .054); males showed greater depersonalization.
DISCUSSION The results did not support the hypotheses that elderly persons with a large personal space would have a larger distortion of body boundary, a larger perception of large body size, a smaller perception of small body size, a larger distortion of body size, and a larger body distortion than elderly persons with a small personal space. In fact, the findings gave results in the opposite direction. It is elderly persons with small personal space who will have a larger perception of large body size than those with a large personal space. No difference between elderly persons with large and small personal spaces was found for perception of small body size; however, when the combined scores for large and small body size are used to determine distortion of body size it is elderly persons with small personal space who have a larger distortion of body size than those with a large personal space. The findings indicated a trend toward significance for elderly persons with a small personal space to be more likely to have a larger distortion of body boundary than those with a large personal space. The findings for the hypotheses when the extremes of personal space were used are similar to the findings - when all subjects were used in analysis. The comparison of extremes of personal space for elderly persons again indicated there is no relationship between large and small personal spaces for distortion of body boundary. It is again the elderly person with a small personal space who has a larger perception of large body size and distortion of body size. The comparison of male and female elderly persons showed males had a larger personal space than females which is congruent with previous work (Altman, 1975). The trend toward significance for depersonalization is also greater for elderly male persons than for females. Thus, the findings indicated it is elderly persons with small personal space who have a larger perceptioo of large body size and distortion of body size than elderly persons with a large personal space. With these findings one needs to look at other variables which might be of importance when considering perceptions of body boundary, personal space, and body size in elderly persons. Individuals with a definite sense of body boundary have a tendency to seek a life style which brings them in dose contact with others. Roe (1953) reports that psychologists have a higher sense of the definiteness of their body boundary than physicists, biologists, and mathematicians. For future studies of perceptions of body boundary it is suggested the occupation of elderly per-
306
.
J. R. PHILLIPS
I
sons be considered since this was not done in this study. Personality needs to be considered also since anxiety-prone persons place greater distances between themselves and others (Smith, 1953, 1954; Luft, 1966; Weinstein, 1968) and interpersonally defensive persons prefer a greater distance becween themselves and others (Meisels & Dosey, 1971), as well as introverts (Williams, 1971). Closer contact with others has been seen in persons with high selfesteem and low authoritarianism (Frankel & Barrett, 197 I ) , high self-concept (Stratton, et al., 1973), and in persons with a clear sense of their body boundary (Frede, et dl., 1968). Dosey and Meisels (1969) showed that more personal space is needed as self-esteem decreases and Kissel (1974) in a study of preferred personal space and self-esteem found that persons with high selfesteem selected less conversational distance than those persons who had low self-esteem. The inclusion of such variables might help clarify the relationships between perceptions of body boundary, personal space, and body size by elderly persons. Fisher (1970) postulated that an individual's sense of a definite body boundary will be increased when he feels he is the focus of interested attention and communication and is a maker of decisions. This enhancement of self will increase the person's sense of delineation of body boundary. Fisher and Cleveland (1968) found that groups composed of persons who had definite body boundaries showed a consistent pattern of equal participation and groups composed of individuals with less definite body boundaries had a tendency to sit passively and wait for one individual to take the lead and tell the group what to do. Could it be that there is a relationship between disengagement and a person's sense of his boundary? C o d d it be that the elderly person who has a definite sense of his body boundary would be more interested in influencing and communicating with people than the person with an indefinite body boundary? Is there a relationship between an elderly person's perception of body boundary and his interaction in a group? The present study should be replicated and consideration also given to other tools which measure a person's perception of his body boundary and body size. It is suggested that other variables such as self-esteem, anxiety, occupation, social interest, level of communication, etc, be included in future studies when personal space, body boundary and body size are investigated in elderly persons. REFERENCES ALTMAN, I.
The environment and social behauior.
Cole, 1975.
San Francisco, Calif.: Brooks/
CLEVELAND, S. E.. & MORTON,R. B. Group behavior and body image: a follow-up study. Human Relrrtions, 1962. 15, 7 7 - 8 5 . DOSEY,M. A., & MEISELS, M. Personal space and self-protection. ]ournal o f Perronality and Social Psychology, 1969, 11, 93-97.
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
307
ESTES, B. W., & RUSH,D. Social schemes: a development study. Journal o f Psychology. 1971, 78, 119-123. . FISHER, S. Body experience in fantasy and behavior. New York: Appleton-CenturyCrofts, 1970. FISHER, S. Body consciousness: you are what you feel. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973. FISHER, S., & CLEVELAND,S. E. Body image and personality. New York: Dover, 1968. FRANKEL,A. S., & BARRETT,J. Variations in personal space as a function of authoritarianism, self-esteem and racial characteristics of a stimulus situation, lournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1971, 37, 95-98. FREDE,M. C., GAUTNEY.D. B., & BAXTER,J. C. Relationship between patterns on the Maps Test. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1968, 32, 575578. GIOIELLA,E. C. The relationship between slowness of response, state anxiety, social isolation and self-esteem and preferred personal space in the elderly. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York Univer., 1977. GOITHEIL, E., COREY, J., & PAREDES,A. Psychological and physiological dimensions of personal space. Journal of Psychology, 1968, 69, 7-9. GUARDO.C. J.. & MEISELS,M. Factor structure of children's personal space schemata. Child Development, 1971, 42, 1307-1312. HALL, E. The hidden dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1966. KISSELL,P. The relationship of self-esteem, programmed music, and time of day to preferred conversational distance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York Univer., 1974. KOSLIN, S., KOSLIN, B., PARGAMENT,R., & BIRD, H. ,Children's social distance constructs: a developmental study. Proceedings o f the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 197 1, 6, 15 1-152. KUETHB,J. L. Social schemas. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 64, 31-68. ( a ) KUETHE, J. L. Social schemas and the reconstruction of social object displays from memory. journal o f Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1762, 64, 71-74. ( b ) LIEBERT,R. S., WERNER,H., & WAPNER, S. Studies in the effect of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 1958, 79, 580-584. LITTLE, K. Personal space. ]ournal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 237-244. LUPT, J. On nonverbal interaction. Journal of Psychology, 1966, 63, 261-268. MEISELS,M., & DOSEY, M. A. Personal space, anger arousal, and psychological defense. Journaj o f Personaliiy, 197 1, 39, 333-334. MAISELS,M.,& GUARDO,C. J. Development of personal space schemata. Child Development, 1969, 49, 1167-1178. ROE. A. A psychological study of eminent psychoIogists and anthropologists, and a comparison with biological and physical scientists. Psychological Monographs, 1953, 67, No. 352. SIMPSON,I. H., & MCKINNEY,J. C. Social aspects of aging. North Grolina: Duke Univer. Press, 1966. SMITH, G. H . Size-distance judgments of human faces (projected images). Joi~rnalo f General Psychology, 1953, 49, 45-64. SMITH,G. H. Personality scores and personal distance effect. lournal of Social PSJVchology, 1954, 39, 57-62. STRAITON, L. O., TEKIPPB, D. J., & FLICK, G. L. Personal space and self-concept. Sociometry, 1973, 36, 424-427. TOWNSEND,P. Policy strategies for the vulnerable minority of the aged. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 1973, 66, 885-887. WAPNER,S. An experimental and theoretical approach to body image. Presented at XVI International Congress of Psychology, Bonn, Germany, 1960.
308
J. R. PHILLIPS
WEINSTEIN,L. The mother-child schema, anxiety, and academic achievement in elementary school boys. Child Development, 1968, 39, 257-264. WILLIAMS, J. L. Personal s ace and its relation to extroversion-introversion. Canadian ]ournu.! of ~ehaviovaf~cience,197 1, 3, 156-160. WOODS.M. D. An exploration of developmental relationships between children's body image boundaries, estimates of body space, and performance of selected gross motor tasks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1966. Accepted January 12, 1979.
@ Perceptual and Motor Skills 1979
AN EXPLORATION OF PERCEPTION OF BODY BOUNDARY, PERSONAL SPACE, AND BODY SIZE I N ELDERLY PERSONS JOHN R. PHILLIPS
New York Uniuerrityl Stmmary.-A study of 108 elderly persons using the Body Distortion Questionnaire and the personal space simulation technique test did not support hypotheses that elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger distortion of body boundary, a larger perception of large body size, a smaller perception of small body size, a larger distortion of body size, and a larger body distortion than elderly persons with a small personal space. The analyses with one-tail t tests showed elderly persons with a small personal space have a larger perception of large body size and a larger distortion of body size than elderly persons with a large personal space. When the extremes of personal space were used the results were the same. Males have a larger personal space and greater distortion of skin perceptions than females.
The present study investigated the relationship between perceptions of body boundary, personal space, and body size of elderly persons. Fisher (1973, p. ix) points out "all that you perceive, think, and believe occurs in the context of your body experiences." Fisher and Cleveland (1968) state a child has the tendency to experience his body boundary as encompassing an area interior to the actual body wall and as he gtows the boundary approaches the body surface; it is the adult who has a regular contour of his boundary which does not adhere strictly to the surface of the body wall. "When the individual reaches a stage of advanced aging and experiences unpleasant changes in his appeatance and a decline in body sensitivity, his body-image boundaries again retreat to more interior sites" (Fisher & Cleveland, 1968, p. 348). Fisher (1970) suggests that the amount of distance a person places between himself and others may reflect how s e m e he feels about his boundary. A schizophrenic's perception of a diffused body boundary results in feelings of being "spread out" and large (Cleveland & Morton, 1962) and schizophrenics react to events at some distance as if they ate direct attacks upon their bodies (Fisher & Cleveland, 1968). Personal space characterizes the distance individuals prefer to maintain between themselves and others. Townsend (1973) postulated that the process of distancing (distance between self and an object) is a means by which the aged decrease sensory input which is anixery-producing and with which they are no longer able to cope. Little (1965) found that close friends approach each other more closely than they do with strangers, and Guardo and Meisels (1971) found that children placed figures labeled as suangers farther apart '245 East 24th Street, Apt.
7E, New York, New York 10010.
300
J. R. PHILLIPS
than figures which represented friends or persons who liked them. There is greater definiteness of personal space as children become older (Meisels & Guardo, 1969; Estes & Rush, 1971; Koslin, et al., 1971) and it is not until adolescence that personal space is developed enough to characterize a variety of situations (Alunan, 1975). In considering the development of personal space, Simpson and McKinney ( 1966) state life-space is constricted in childhood, expands during early adulthood and eventually constricts in late middle age. As a person moves through his life cycle changes occur in his sense of self which encompasses perceptions of body size. Schnall (cited by Wapner, 1960; Fisher, 1970) found that subjects placed in a "Lilliputian" room (lowered ceiling and miniature furniture) reported a sense of increased body size as evidenced by changes in perceived arm length. Fisher (1970) postulated that, since enhancing the boundary of a body area decreases its apparent size, it would be expected that persons with vague boundaries might perceive their bodies as larger than those whose boundaries are well articulated. Liebert, et al. (1958) found when definiteness of body boundaries was reduced by LSD there was a perceived increase in the size of the body. Wapner (1960) in a study involving subjects ranging in age from 4 through 25 yr. predicted children would overestimate head size more than adults because they have a less definite body boundary. All ages had a marked overestimation, but the overestimation was the greatest for younger children. Woods ( 1966), using estimations of body size from boys and girls at ages 8, 10, and 12 yr., found that those children with more definite body boundaries were less likely to overestimate head size. From the review of the literature it was indicated a person's perception of his body boundary and its relationship to the environment are involved in his development and the perception a person has of his personal space is involved in this process. The perception a person has of the size of his body is influenced by the sense he has of his body boundary as he interacts with the environment. The interaction a person has with his environment is regulated to some degree by the amount of personal space he desires when he comes in contact with others. This research employs four definitions: Personal Space: The distance an individual prefers between himself and others for comforrable conversation as evidenced by the distance between the subject's free-placement of two figures o n a board (Hall. 1966; Altman. 1 9 7 5 ) . Body Boundary Distortion: The subject's perception of the demarcation of his body from the environment as measured by the Body Distortion Questionnaire (Fisher. 1 9 7 0 ) . Body Size: The subject's perception of the size of his body as being either large or small as measured by the Body Distortion Questionnaire (Fisher, 1 9 7 0 ) . Body size
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
301
distortion is the combined score of a person's perception of his body as being large and small. Body Distortion: The perception a person has of his body in all of the categories measured by the Body Distortion Questionnaire (Fisher, 1970).
The hypotheses tested are: (1) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger distortion of body boundary than those with a small personal space; ( 2 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger perception of large body size than those with a small personal space; ( 3 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a smaller perception of small body size than those with a small personal space; ( 4 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger distortion of body size than those with a small personal space; and ( 5 ) elderly persons with a large personal space will have a larger body distortion than those with a small personal space.
METHOD subject^ The sample was composed of 108 elderly persons (54 men and 54 women) who were paid volunteers recruited from senior citizens centers in a large metropolitan area (New York City). The mean age of the sample was 69.7 yr., with a range of 60 to 87 yr. The subjects were limited to American-born 1966). All subpersons since personal space is influenced by culture (Hall, jects had to be able to read and write English since research tools required these attributes. The sample was divided at the median of the personal space scores to give a group of 54 subjects with a small personal space and having a mean of .59 mm with a range of .10 mm to 3.50 mrn and a group of 54 subjects with a large personal space with a mean of 9.0 mm and having a range of '3.60 mm to 34.30 mm. Instsuments Personal space stnzalation test.-An adaptation of the simulation technique test to measure personal space developed by Kuethe (1962a, 1962b) was used. This adaptation known as the free-placement technique (Altman, 1975) is similar to that used by Gioiella (1977). The test requires a board 18 X 18 in., covered with grey felt; this is placed before the subject on a table. There are two 4 m m black felt, circular figures which represent the subject and a casual acquaintance. The directions are: "Here is a figure which represents you. Place it on the board. Here is another figure which represents a casual acquaintance. Place this figure on the board at a distance from the figure representing you that is comfortable for conversation." Gottheil, et al. (1968) assessed the validity of this type of test in a study in which physical distance and social distance were measured directly and with the silhouette method, respectively. The direct measurement of physical distance
302
J. R. PHILLIPS
used a camera through a one-way mirror photographing the distance chosen by the subject. Later the subject was asked to represent the same situation by moving pieces on a board. A correlation coefficient of 0.40 for the two measurements was obtained ( p < 0.01). (1970) devised this test to find Body Distortion Questionnaire.-Fisher out if there are unique kinds of distorted body experiences which are associated with disturbances in reality testing. The subject answers "Yes," "No," or "Undecided" to 82 statements which refer to different kinds of distorted body experience. There are seven categories. These categories with examples are: ( 1) large-perception of body as large ("My hands feel big"), ( 2 ) smallperception of body as small ("My arms feel short"), ( 3 ) boundary loss-loss of body boundaries ("I feel like my body is unprotected"), ( 4 ) dirty-body dirty or contaminated ("I feel like I should wash my hands"), ( 5 ) blocked openings-blocking of body openings ("My ears feel stopped up"), (6) skinunusual skin sensations ("My skin feels tighter than usual"), and ( 7 ) depersondization-perception of one's body as alien or foreign ("My hands feel like they are not mine") (Fisher, 1970). A total body distortion score is obtained by adding the number of items in the questionnaire checked either "Yes" or "Undecided." In addition, a percentage representation of the seven subcategories can be obtained by taking the number of items checked "Yes" or "Undecided" for each category and dividing it by the total number of items checked "Yes" or "Undecided" in all categories. Percentage scores minimize the effects upon the specific categories of subject's general tendency to check either large or small number of items (Fisher, 1970). Fisher reports that the test-retest reliability of the total body distortion score has been consistently moderate to high (test-retest coefficients of .81 to 9 5 ) for normal subjects, but the test-retest reliabilities were considerably lower for the seven subcategory scores. Procedure Each subject was greeted and was told the investigator was interested in gathering information about elderly persons' perceptions for a research project. After permission was obtained, a Personal Data Sheet which asked for age, sex, and place of birth was completed. The distortion questionnaire was then answered and was followed with the personal space simulation technique test. The distance berween the two figures of the personal space test was measured with a millimeter ruler by the investigator and recorded on the Personal Data Sheet.
RESULTS Scores on the questionnaire and personal space test collected from 108 elderly persons ( 5 4 males and 54 females) were used to test the hypotheses
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
303
by one-tail t tests. Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations for the bariables in the analyses. None of the hypotheses as predicted were supported by the analyses. Hypothesis 1 which predicted that elderly persons with a large personal space would have a larger distortion of body boundary than those with a small personal space fell just below significance in the opposite direction ( t = 1.50, p = .068). Hypothesis 2 which stated that elderly persons with a large petsonal space would have a larger perception of large body size than those with a small personal space was significant (t = 1.84, 9 = .034) in the opposite direction to that predicted. Hypothesis 4 which stated that elderly persons with a large personal space would have a larger distortion of body size than elderly persons with a small personal space was also significant ( t = 1.92; p = .029) in the direction opposite to re diction. One-way t tests for the means for the categories of blocked opening, skin, dirt, and depersonalization of the questionnaire for elderly persons with small personal space and for elderly persons with large personal space were not significant ( p > 0.05). TABLE 1
MEANAND STANDARDDEVIATION FOR CATEGOR~ES OF BODYD T S T O R ~ O N QUESTIONNAIRE AND BODYSIZE DISTORT'ION FOR ELDERLY PERSONS WITH SMALLPERSONAL SPACEAND LARGEPERSONAL SPACE Variables
Small Personal Space M SD
Large Personal Space M SD
t
Body Distortion Large Body Size Small Body Size Body Size Distortion Body Boundary Distortion Blocked Openings Skin Dirt
Depersonalization " p < .05. Since the scores on the personal space test clustering around the median showed only a small variation the extremes were used to test the hypotheses. The lowest 40 scores were used for small personal space (mean = 1.04 mm; range = 0.10 mm to 2.10 mm) and the highest 40 scores were used for large personal space (M = 13.35 mm; range = 6.00 mm to 34.30 mm). This eliminated the middle 28 scores on the personal space test. The mean and standard deviation for these two extreme groups are shown in Table 2. None of the hypotheses using the means for the extremes of personal space were supported as predicted. However, Hypothesis 2 ( t = 2.28, p = .013)
J. R. PHILLIPS
TABLE 2 MEANAND STANDARDDEVIATIONFOR T H E CATEGORIES OF BODYDISTORTION QuESTIONNA~RE AND BODYSIZE DISTORTION FOR ELDERLY PERSONS WITH EXTREMES OF SMALL PERSONAL SPACEAND LARGEPERSONAL SPACE Variables
Extremes of Small Personal Space M
SD
Extremes of Large Personal Space M
f
SD
Body Distortion Large Body Size Small Body Size Body Size Distortion Body Boundary Distortion Blodred Openings Skin
Dirt
Depersonalization * p < .05. and Hypothesis 4 (t = 2.29, p = .013) were again significant in the opposite direction to prediction. The categories of blocked openings, skin, dirt, and depersonalization of the questionnaire were again nonsignificant. The sample of 108 elderly persons was divided into men (age mean = 68.85 yr.; range 60 to 86) and women (age mean = 70.55 yr.; range 60 to 87) with 54 subjects in each group. Table 3 gives the means and standard deviations for personal space, categories of the questionnaire, and body size distortion for elderly male and female persons. Male subjects had a larger personal space than female subjects ( t = 1.84, p = .034). None of the other TABLE 3 MEANSAND STANDARD DEVIATIONS FOR PERSONAL SPACE,CATEGORIES OF BODYDISTORTION QuESTIONNATRE,AND BODYSIZEDISTORTION FOR FEMALE AND h U L E ELDERLY PERSONS Male
Variables M Personal Space Body Distortion Large Body Size Small Body Size Body Size Distortion Body Boundary Distortion Blocked Openings Skin Dirt Depersonalization * p < .05. t p < .01.
SD
Female M SD
f
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
305
comparisons were significant except for skin where males had a larger distortion than females ( t = 2.60, p = .006). The comparison of depersonalization for males and females was not quite significant ( t = 1.63, p = .054); males showed greater depersonalization.
DISCUSSION The results did not support the hypotheses that elderly persons with a large personal space would have a larger distortion of body boundary, a larger perception of large body size, a smaller perception of small body size, a larger distortion of body size, and a larger body distortion than elderly persons with a small personal space. In fact, the findings gave results in the opposite direction. It is elderly persons with small personal space who will have a larger perception of large body size than those with a large personal space. No difference between elderly persons with large and small personal spaces was found for perception of small body size; however, when the combined scores for large and small body size are used to determine distortion of body size it is elderly persons with small personal space who have a larger distortion of body size than those with a large personal space. The findings indicated a trend toward significance for elderly persons with a small personal space to be more likely to have a larger distortion of body boundary than those with a large personal space. The findings for the hypotheses when the extremes of personal space were used are similar to the findings - when all subjects were used in analysis. The comparison of extremes of personal space for elderly persons again indicated there is no relationship between large and small personal spaces for distortion of body boundary. It is again the elderly person with a small personal space who has a larger perception of large body size and distortion of body size. The comparison of male and female elderly persons showed males had a larger personal space than females which is congruent with previous work (Altman, 1975). The trend toward significance for depersonalization is also greater for elderly male persons than for females. Thus, the findings indicated it is elderly persons with small personal space who have a larger perceptioo of large body size and distortion of body size than elderly persons with a large personal space. With these findings one needs to look at other variables which might be of importance when considering perceptions of body boundary, personal space, and body size in elderly persons. Individuals with a definite sense of body boundary have a tendency to seek a life style which brings them in dose contact with others. Roe (1953) reports that psychologists have a higher sense of the definiteness of their body boundary than physicists, biologists, and mathematicians. For future studies of perceptions of body boundary it is suggested the occupation of elderly per-
306
.
J. R. PHILLIPS
I
sons be considered since this was not done in this study. Personality needs to be considered also since anxiety-prone persons place greater distances between themselves and others (Smith, 1953, 1954; Luft, 1966; Weinstein, 1968) and interpersonally defensive persons prefer a greater distance becween themselves and others (Meisels & Dosey, 1971), as well as introverts (Williams, 1971). Closer contact with others has been seen in persons with high selfesteem and low authoritarianism (Frankel & Barrett, 197 I ) , high self-concept (Stratton, et al., 1973), and in persons with a clear sense of their body boundary (Frede, et dl., 1968). Dosey and Meisels (1969) showed that more personal space is needed as self-esteem decreases and Kissel (1974) in a study of preferred personal space and self-esteem found that persons with high selfesteem selected less conversational distance than those persons who had low self-esteem. The inclusion of such variables might help clarify the relationships between perceptions of body boundary, personal space, and body size by elderly persons. Fisher (1970) postulated that an individual's sense of a definite body boundary will be increased when he feels he is the focus of interested attention and communication and is a maker of decisions. This enhancement of self will increase the person's sense of delineation of body boundary. Fisher and Cleveland (1968) found that groups composed of persons who had definite body boundaries showed a consistent pattern of equal participation and groups composed of individuals with less definite body boundaries had a tendency to sit passively and wait for one individual to take the lead and tell the group what to do. Could it be that there is a relationship between disengagement and a person's sense of his boundary? C o d d it be that the elderly person who has a definite sense of his body boundary would be more interested in influencing and communicating with people than the person with an indefinite body boundary? Is there a relationship between an elderly person's perception of body boundary and his interaction in a group? The present study should be replicated and consideration also given to other tools which measure a person's perception of his body boundary and body size. It is suggested that other variables such as self-esteem, anxiety, occupation, social interest, level of communication, etc, be included in future studies when personal space, body boundary and body size are investigated in elderly persons. REFERENCES ALTMAN, I.
The environment and social behauior.
Cole, 1975.
San Francisco, Calif.: Brooks/
CLEVELAND, S. E.. & MORTON,R. B. Group behavior and body image: a follow-up study. Human Relrrtions, 1962. 15, 7 7 - 8 5 . DOSEY,M. A., & MEISELS, M. Personal space and self-protection. ]ournal o f Perronality and Social Psychology, 1969, 11, 93-97.
PERCEPTUAL SPACE OF ELDERLY
307
ESTES, B. W., & RUSH,D. Social schemes: a development study. Journal o f Psychology. 1971, 78, 119-123. . FISHER, S. Body experience in fantasy and behavior. New York: Appleton-CenturyCrofts, 1970. FISHER, S. Body consciousness: you are what you feel. Englewood Cliffs, N. J.: Prentice-Hall, 1973. FISHER, S., & CLEVELAND,S. E. Body image and personality. New York: Dover, 1968. FRANKEL,A. S., & BARRETT,J. Variations in personal space as a function of authoritarianism, self-esteem and racial characteristics of a stimulus situation, lournal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1971, 37, 95-98. FREDE,M. C., GAUTNEY.D. B., & BAXTER,J. C. Relationship between patterns on the Maps Test. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology, 1968, 32, 575578. GIOIELLA,E. C. The relationship between slowness of response, state anxiety, social isolation and self-esteem and preferred personal space in the elderly. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York Univer., 1977. GOITHEIL, E., COREY, J., & PAREDES,A. Psychological and physiological dimensions of personal space. Journal of Psychology, 1968, 69, 7-9. GUARDO.C. J.. & MEISELS,M. Factor structure of children's personal space schemata. Child Development, 1971, 42, 1307-1312. HALL, E. The hidden dimension. New York: Doubleday, 1966. KISSELL,P. The relationship of self-esteem, programmed music, and time of day to preferred conversational distance. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, New York Univer., 1974. KOSLIN, S., KOSLIN, B., PARGAMENT,R., & BIRD, H. ,Children's social distance constructs: a developmental study. Proceedings o f the Annual Convention of the American Psychological Association, 197 1, 6, 15 1-152. KUETHB,J. L. Social schemas. Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1962, 64, 31-68. ( a ) KUETHE, J. L. Social schemas and the reconstruction of social object displays from memory. journal o f Abnormal and Social Psychology, 1762, 64, 71-74. ( b ) LIEBERT,R. S., WERNER,H., & WAPNER, S. Studies in the effect of Lysergic Acid Diethylamide. Archives of Neurology and Psychiatry, 1958, 79, 580-584. LITTLE, K. Personal space. ]ournal of Experimental and Social Psychology, 1965, 1, 237-244. LUPT, J. On nonverbal interaction. Journal of Psychology, 1966, 63, 261-268. MEISELS,M., & DOSEY, M. A. Personal space, anger arousal, and psychological defense. Journaj o f Personaliiy, 197 1, 39, 333-334. MAISELS,M.,& GUARDO,C. J. Development of personal space schemata. Child Development, 1969, 49, 1167-1178. ROE. A. A psychological study of eminent psychoIogists and anthropologists, and a comparison with biological and physical scientists. Psychological Monographs, 1953, 67, No. 352. SIMPSON,I. H., & MCKINNEY,J. C. Social aspects of aging. North Grolina: Duke Univer. Press, 1966. SMITH, G. H . Size-distance judgments of human faces (projected images). Joi~rnalo f General Psychology, 1953, 49, 45-64. SMITH,G. H. Personality scores and personal distance effect. lournal of Social PSJVchology, 1954, 39, 57-62. STRAITON, L. O., TEKIPPB, D. J., & FLICK, G. L. Personal space and self-concept. Sociometry, 1973, 36, 424-427. TOWNSEND,P. Policy strategies for the vulnerable minority of the aged. Proceedings of the Royal Society of Medicine, 1973, 66, 885-887. WAPNER,S. An experimental and theoretical approach to body image. Presented at XVI International Congress of Psychology, Bonn, Germany, 1960.
308
J. R. PHILLIPS
WEINSTEIN,L. The mother-child schema, anxiety, and academic achievement in elementary school boys. Child Development, 1968, 39, 257-264. WILLIAMS, J. L. Personal s ace and its relation to extroversion-introversion. Canadian ]ournu.! of ~ehaviovaf~cience,197 1, 3, 156-160. WOODS.M. D. An exploration of developmental relationships between children's body image boundaries, estimates of body space, and performance of selected gross motor tasks. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Ohio State University, 1966. Accepted January 12, 1979.
