Perry

• Psych Being Investigated

  interpersonal distance (personal space): essential to social interaction

  -choose based on relationship

  Edward T Hall zones: intimate, personal, social, public

  
  

  FACTORS: culture (Beaulieu, 2004)

  social hormone oxytocin (OT) helps regulate social thinking/beh

  -dep on individuals situation, ind attributes, culture

  -test effects of OT using placebo (control)

  
  

  Helping behavior, empathy: recognize/share thoughts/feelings of another

  -ind differences suggest trait can shape how people process social cues

  -linked to personal space preferences
• Background

  investigate how peoples personal space preferences are affected by interpersonal distance

  -influenced by action of social hormones on individuals preference (OT)

  whether people w different empathy abilities were influenced by OT in same/different ways when asked ab personal space pref

  -interaction effect: 2 IV OT + empathy + condition on DV (pref)

  -combined effect of IV greater/less than each variable on own
• Aim

  test differential effect of social hormone oxytocin (OT) on person space preference in relation to empathy ability

  -believed controlling empathetic traits in individual par would reveal effect of OT on choices

  whether highly empathetic individuals prefer closer distances while low empathetic individuals prefer greater interpersonal distances given OT
• Research Method

  laboratory exp: university of Haifa; mixed experiment design to allocate participants

  Exp 1/2: independent groups; IV: empathy operationalized high/low

  -naturally occurring, not manipulated by researchers

  -repeated measures design: took part in both levels of second IV 'treatment'

  -IV operationalized to OT or placebo administered WAS manipulated
• Method 3rd Exp

  Exp1: 3rd IV 'condition' repeated measures lvls of stranger, authority, friend, ball

  -no 3rd IV Exp2, asked to imagine = no manipulation

  DV: personal space requirements

  Exp1: operationalized pref distance betw approaching person/obj

  Exp2: operationalized pref distance/angle betw 2 chairs
• Sample


  54 male undergrads Univ Haifa, aged 19-32 (mean age 25.29)

  -participated for course credit/payment

  -norm vision, no history psychiatric or neurological disorders

  
  

  divided into 2 groups pased on Interpersonal Reactivity Index (IRI): 28 self-report measure, 4 7 item subscales all relating to empath
• High Interpersonal Reactivity group


  contained 20 participants with empathy scores greater than/equal to 40

  -mean age 23.9 years
• Low Interpersonal Rectivity group


  contained 20 participants with empathy scores below 33

  -mean age of 25.9 years
• Procedure: OT administration

  randomly administed treatment:

  -24 internation units in 250ml of intranasal OT

  -OR placebo saline solution (did not contain hormone)

  nasal drops self administered by nasal dropper, supervision

  -used double-blind technique: neither participant nor experimenter knew whether participant received OT/saline solution
• Proc: Assessment of empathy

  after admin par completed IRI online questionnaire

  -after completion given nature magazines, waited in quiet room 45 mins

  order of exp counterbalanced*
• Exp 1: Comfortable Interpersonal Distance (CID) paradigm

  mod older version Comfortable Interpersonal Distance (CID) paradigm

  -circle presented comp screen, imagine person approaching radius

  -indicate (pres keyboard) where want person to stop approach

  -animation options for: close friend, stranger, authority figure, rolling ball

  animation stopped when figures collided or participant pressed space bar

  -24 trials each figure, 96 total

  -recorded percentage of rem distance from total distance
• Exp 2: choosing rooms (intamacy context)

  after 2 runs of exp (placebo and OT),sit in room discuss personal topics

  -choose one room they preferred, (told used to design a room ac pref)

  Computerized stimuli: 2 identical chairs in middle, table, cupboard, plant, lamp and clock

  exp cond: preferred distance betw chairs

  -distance betw chairs (20-140cm w intervals of 20cm)

  -angle of chairs positions (0 facing foward, 45 each or 90 facing each other)

  control cond: pref distance betw table/plant

  -distance betw table/plant (200-320cm) w intervals 20cm

  -angle of table/plant pos
• Exp 2

  21 different pairs of chair and table/plant distances

  -3 options for each pair of angles, repeated 7 times = 21

  each par shown total 84 pairs, repeated twice equal 168 pairs overall

  mean preferred distance betw chairs, table/plant, angle calculated
• Results: Exp 1 CID (3IV)

  condition:

  -differences found betw preferred distances betw stranger, authority, ball, friend

  -supports idea par need personal distance increases the less well approaching figure is known to them

  interaction effect of IV: treatment + empathy

  -OT found to decrease mean preferred distance from high empathy group

  -op effect in low empathy group: increased preferred distance betw self/other

  -suggests administration of OT has differential effect rather same
• Results 3rd IV

  treatment + condition +empathy:

  placebo: high empathizers showed sig differences betw preferred distances friends/authority as well as strangers

  OT: same dif appeared sg differences betw ball and stranger/authority

  -suggests ball is an invatation to social interaction, cue which is enhanced w treatment of OT for high empathizers

  ALL go in order distaces inc-dec: stanger, authority, ball, friend
• Results Exp 2

  different preferences for chair distance, not for preferred angles

  -high emp group: chose closer chair distances following OT admin than placebo admin

  -OT admin op affect for par in low empathy group

  only present in experimental condition (dist betw chairs)

  -OT and empathy had no effect on choices of dist betw plant/table

  -supports social salience hyp as OT didnt affect participants general preferences, only pref that have social context
• Conclusion

  administration OT enhances social cues in opposite ways for individuals w different empathetic abilities

  -supports idea of social salience

  people w low empathetic abilitiy respond to OT w a preference for increased person distance

  those w high empathetic ability respond to OT w preference for decreased personal distance

  -results confirmed findings of prev personal space research, people need less distance betw selves/close friends than w strangers
• Strengths

  high internal validity:

  -order of exp counterbalanced, prevent order effects

  -extraneous var controlled: soc interaction after OT/placebo minimized through waiting room

  -double-blind procedure: less subject demand characteristics, results free from researcher bias

  
  

  lab exp: standardized procedure

  -images generated w maximum accuracy and consistency

  -results reliable

  -exp procedures could be repeated, expected produce same results
• Weaknesses

  lab exp: artificial setting, lacks ecological validity

  -lacks mundane realism through computer-generated images (everyday life influenced by complex cues)

  
  

  limited generalizibility: only male participants social dynamics/hormones

  
  

  marginal sig of results: interaction betw treatment OT and empathy only marg sig in CID (p=0.09)
• Ethics

  informed consent, reputation kept

  -no side effects = protect from phys harm

  decieved about purpose task in exp2 ( no personal discussion took place)

  -unlikely to cause psych distress

  par fully debriefed after study, informed aim