Interpersonal Distance in the SARS-CoV-2 Crisis

Larger comfortable interpersonal distances in adults exposed to child maltreatment: The role of depressive symptoms and social anxiety

Previous studies report a preference for larger comfortable interpersonal distance (CIPD) in individuals with child maltreatment (CM) when being approached by others. Yet, research on approaching others, as opposed to being approached, as well as on potential effects of social anxiety and depression is lacking. We investigated if CM and depressive symptoms influence CIPD and if social anxiety mediates the possible association of CM and CIPD when approaching a female stranger. One hundred ten participants with CM (CM) and 58 participants without CM (non-CM) experiences performed the stop-distance paradigm and stopped first when feeling uncomfortable (D1) and again when feeling very uncomfortable (D2). CM experiences were associated with a preference for larger CIPD, independent of depressive symptoms. All CM subtypes were associated with a larger D2. The relationship between CM and CIPD was partially mediated by social anxiety. These novel findings can help to develop interventions strengthening socially relevant skills and processes in those affected by CM, targeting alterations in social anxiety and depression.

The relationship between interpersonal distance preference and estimation accuracy in autism

People naturally seek an interpersonal distance that feels comfortable, striking a balance between not being too close or too far from others until reaching a state of equilibrium. Previous studies on interpersonal distance preferences among autistic individuals have yielded inconsistent results. Some show a preference for greater distance, while others indicate a preference for shorter distances, or reveal higher variance in preferences among autistic individuals. In a related vein, previous studies have also investigated the way autistics accurately judge distance, and these studies have received inconsistent results, with some showing superior spatial abilities and others indicating biases in distance estimations. However, the link between distance estimation and preference has never been examined. To address this gap, our study measured interpersonal distance preferences and estimations and tested the correlation between the two factors. The results indicate greater variance among autistic people in both the preference of distance and the ability to estimate distance accurately, suggesting that inconsistencies in previous studies originate from greater individual differences among autistics. Furthermore, only among autistic individuals were interpersonal distance preference and estimation bias associated in a manner that violated equilibrium. Underestimation bias (judging others as closer than they are) was linked to a preference for closer proximity, while overestimation bias (judging others as further away) was associated with a preference for maintaining a greater distance. This connection suggests that biases in the estimation of interpersonal distance contribute to extreme preferences (being too close or too far away). Taken together, the findings suggest that biases in the estimation of interpersonal distance are associated with socially inappropriate distance preferences among autistics.

Interpersonal distance perception during the normalization of an pandemic situation: Effects of mask-wearing and vaccination

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of anti-pandemic measures, including wearing a face mask and receiving vaccinations, on interpersonal distance (IPD) during the normalization stage of the COVID-19 pandemic. Virtual reality (VR) technology was used to simulate the experimental environment and a confederate in different conditions. Thirty-one participants were asked to approach the virtual confederate, who could exhibit three vaccination states and two mask-wearing conditions, actively and passively in both indoor and outdoor environments. ANOVA results showed that the participants kept a smaller IPD from the confederate wearing a face mask (IPD = 125.6 cm) than from the one without a face mask (IPD = 154.2 cm). The effects of vaccination states were significant, with the largest distance for an unvaccinated confederate (IPD = 182.3 cm) and the smallest distance for the confederate who had received a booster vaccine (IPD = 111.5 cm). Significant effects of environment were also found, with the participants maintaining a larger IPD in an outdoor environment (IPD = 143.4 cm) than in an indoor room (IPD = 136.4 cm). Additionally, the IPD collected when the participants were passively approached (IPD = 149.6 cm) was significantly larger than that obtained when they actively approached the confederate (IPD = 130.3 cm). Moreover, when the participants faced a confederate who had received a booster vaccine and wore a mask, the IPD was not significantly different from that collected before the COVID-19 pandemic in both the active and passive patterns. These findings help us to better understand the nature of IPD and human behaviors during the normalization stage of the pandemic and provide scientific suggestions for policymakers to develop pandemic-prevention measures.

Perception of interpersonal distance and social distancing before and during COVID-19 pandemic

Since COVID-19 is easily transmitted among people in close physical proximity, the focus of epidemiological policy during the COVID-19 crisis included major restrictions on interpersonal distance. However, the way in which distance restrictions affected spatial perception is unclear. In the current study, we examined interpersonal distance preferences and perceptions at three time points: pre-pandemic, early post-pandemic, and late post-pandemic. The results indicate that following the pandemic outbreak, people perceived others as farther away than they actually were, suggesting that the distance restrictions were associated with an enlargement of perceived interpersonal distance. Interestingly, however, people maintained the same distance from one another as before the outbreak, indicating no change in actual distance behavior due to the risk of infection. These findings suggest that COVID-19 was associated with a change in the way distance is perceived, while in practice, people maintain the same distance as before. In contrast, COVID-related anxiety predicted both a preference for maintaining a greater distance and a bias toward underestimating perceived distance from others. Thus, individuals who were highly fearful of COVID-19 perceived other people to be closer than they actually were and preferred to maintain a larger distance from them. The results suggest that subjective risk can lead to an increased perception of danger and a subsequent change in behavior. Taken together, even when behaviors should logically change, the decision-making process can be based on distorted perceptions. This insight may be used to predict public compliance.

Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19

Perception of peripersonal space (PPS) and interpersonal distance (IPD) has been shown to be modified by external factors such as perceived danger, the use of tools, and social factors. Especially in times of social distancing in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic, it is vital to study factors that modify PPS and IPD. The present work addresses the question of whether wearing a face mask as a protection tool and social interaction impact the perception of IPD. We tested estimated IPD in pictures at three distances: 50 cm, 90 cm, and 150 cm in both social interaction (shaking hands) and without interaction and when the two people in the pictures wore a face mask or not. Data from 60 subjects were analyzed in a linear mixed model (on both difference in distance estimation to the depicted distance and in absolute distance estimation) and in a 3 (distance: 50, 90, 150) × 2 (interaction: no interaction, shake hands), × 2 face mask (no mask, mask) rmANOVA on distance estimation difference. All analyses showed that at a distance of 50 and 90 cm, participants generally underestimated the IPD while at an IPD of 150 cm, participants overestimated the distance. This could be grounded in perceived danger and avoidance behavior at closer distances, while the wider distance between persons was not perceived as dangerous. Our findings at an IPD of 90 cm show that social interaction has the largest effect at the border of our PPS, while the face mask did not affect social interaction at either distance. In addition, the ANOVA results indicate that when no social interaction was displayed, participants felt less unsafe when depicted persons wore a face mask at distances of 90 and 150 cm. This shows that participants are on the one hand aware of the given safety measures and internalized them; on the other hand, that refraining from physical social interaction helps to get close to other persons.

Social rather than physical crowding reduces the required interpersonal distance in virtual environments

Interpersonal distance plays an important role in human social interaction. With the increasing usage of virtual reality in social interaction, people's interpersonal distance in virtual space attracts great attention. It remains unclear whether and to what extent human-required interpersonal distance is altered by crowded virtual scenes. In this study, we manipulated crowd density in virtual environments and used the classical stop-distance paradigm to measure required interpersonal distances at different crowd densities. We found that people's required interpersonal distance decreased with increased social crowdedness but not with physical crowdedness. Moreover, the decrease of two types of interpersonal distance was associated with the globally averaged crowd density rather than local crowd density. The reduction is not due to the imitation of other virtual humans in the crowd. Moreover, we developed a model to describe the quantitative relationships between the crowdedness of the environment and the required interpersonal distance. Our finding provides insights into designing user-friendly virtual humans in metaverse virtual worlds.

Interdigitated Columnar Representation of Personal Space and Visual Space in Human Parietal Cortex

Personal space (PS) is the space around the body that people prefer to maintain between themselves and unfamiliar others. Intrusion into personal space evokes discomfort and an urge to move away. Physiologic studies in nonhuman primates suggest that defensive responses to intruding stimuli involve the parietal cortex. We hypothesized that the spatial encoding of interpersonal distance is initially transformed from purely sensory to more egocentric mapping within human parietal cortex. This hypothesis was tested using 7 Tesla (7T) fMRI at high spatial resolution (1.1 mm isotropic), in seven subjects (four females, three males). In response to visual stimuli presented at a range of virtual distances, we found two categories of distance encoding in two corresponding radially-extending columns of activity within parietal cortex. One set of columns (P columns) responded selectively to moving and stationary face images presented at virtual distances that were nearer (but not farther) than each subject's behaviorally-defined personal space boundary. In most P columns, BOLD response amplitudes increased monotonically and nonlinearly with increasing virtual face proximity. In the remaining P columns, BOLD responses decreased with increasing proximity. A second set of parietal columns (D columns) responded selectively to disparity-based distance cues (near or far) in random dot stimuli, similar to disparity-selective columns described previously in occipital cortex. Critically, in parietal cortex, P columns were topographically interdigitated (nonoverlapping) with D columns. These results suggest that visual spatial information is transformed from visual to body-centered (or person-centered) dimensions in multiple local sites within human parietal cortex.SIGNIFICANCE STATEMENT Recent COVID-related social distancing practices highlight the need to better understand brain mechanisms which regulate "personal space" (PS), which is defined by the closest interpersonal distance that is comfortable for an individual. Using high spatial resolution brain imaging, we tested whether a map of external space is transformed from purely visual (3D-based) information to a more egocentric map (related to personal space) in human parietal cortex. We confirmed this transformation and further showed that it was mediated by two mutually segregated sets of columns: one which encoded interpersonal distance and another that encoded visual distance. These results suggest that the cortical transformation of sensory-centered to person-centered encoding of space near the body involves short-range communication across interdigitated columns within parietal cortex.

Communicating and reading emotion with masked faces in the Covid era: A short review of the literature

Face masks have proven to be key to slowing down the SARS-Cov2 virus spread in the COVID-19 pandemic context. However, wearing face masks is not devoid of "side-effects", at both the physical and psychosocial levels. In particular, masks hinder emotion reading from facial expressions as they hide a significant part of the face. This disturbs both holistic and featural processing of facial expressions and, therefore, impairs emotion recognition, and influences many aspects of human social behavior. Communication in general is disrupted by face masks, as they modify the wearer's voice and prevent the audience from using lip reading or other non-verbal cues for speech comprehension. Individuals suffering from psychiatric conditions with impairment of communication, are at higher risk of distress because masks increase their difficulties to read emotions from faces. The identification and acknowledgement of these "side-effects" on communication are necessary because they warrant further work on adaptive solutions that will help foster the use of face masks by the greatest number.

How facial masks alter the interaction of gaze direction, head orientation, and emotion recognition

The COVID-19 pandemic has altered the way we interact with each other: mandatory mask-wearing obscures facial information that is crucial for emotion recognition. Whereas the influence of wearing a mask on emotion recognition has been repeatedly investigated, little is known about the impact on interaction effects among emotional signals and other social signals. Therefore, the current study sought to explore how gaze direction, head orientation, and emotional expression interact with respect to emotion perception, and how these interactions are altered by wearing a face mask. In two online experiments, we presented face stimuli from the Radboud Faces Database displaying different facial expressions (anger, fear, happiness, neutral, and sadness), gaze directions (−13°, 0°, and 13°), and head orientations (−45°, 0°, and 45°) – either without (Experiment 1) or with mask (Experiment 2). Participants categorized the displayed emotional expressions. Not surprisingly, masks impaired emotion recognition. Surprisingly, without the mask, emotion recognition was unaffected by averted head orientations and only slightly affected by gaze direction. The mask strongly interfered with this ability. The mask increased the influence of head orientation and gaze direction, in particular for the emotions that were poorly recognized with mask. The results suggest that in case of uncertainty due to ambiguity or absence of signals, we seem to unconsciously factor in extraneous information.

During the COVID-19 pandemic participants prefer settings with a face mask, no interaction and at a closer distance

Peripersonal space is the space surrounding our body, where multisensory integration of stimuli and action execution take place. The size of peripersonal space is flexible and subject to change by various personal and situational factors. The dynamic representation of our peripersonal space modulates our spatial behaviors towards other individuals. During the COVID-19 pandemic, this spatial behavior was modified by two further factors: social distancing and wearing a face mask. Evidence from offline and online studies on the impact of a face mask on pro-social behavior is mixed. In an attempt to clarify the role of face masks as pro-social or anti-social signals, 235 observers participated in the present online study. They watched pictures of two models standing at three different distances from each other (50, 90 and 150 cm), who were either wearing a face mask or not and were either interacting by initiating a hand shake or just standing still. The observers' task was to classify the model by gender. Our results show that observers react fastest, and therefore show least avoidance, for the shortest distances (50 and 90 cm) but only when models wear a face mask and do not interact. Thus, our results document both pro- and anti-social consequences of face masks as a result of the complex interplay between social distancing and interactive behavior. Practical implications of these findings are discussed.

The COVID-19 Stress Perceived on Social Distance and Gender-Based Implications

The COVID-19 pandemic is an unprecedented event entailing long-term consequences on population health and welfare. Those who contracted the coronavirus may have suffered from both physical and mental health issues that unfold the need for tailored intervention strategies. Hence, our study aims to investigate the psychological and social consequences of COVID-19 on a sample of 86 participants, encompassing 43 patients (clinical group; 25 women; mean age = 50.4 ± 10.1 years) recruited from Bari University Hospital, 19 of whom were hospitalized due to the disease. The remaining 43 were individuals not fallen ill with COVID-19 to date (control group; 25 women; mean age = 50.4 ± 10.1 years). The investigation yielded significant gender differences in post-traumatic stress symptoms, depression, and representation of interpersonal distance (IPD), evaluated through the IES-R, the BDI-II, and the IVAS task, respectively. This pattern of results was not replicated in the control group. In general, participants who reported having experienced the most intense post-traumatic symptoms also presented a greater mood deflection and, more specifically, within the clinical group women obtained the highest scores on both scales. Women reported higher IES-R and BDI-II scores compared to men, that could indicate that women who have contracted COVID-19 are more exposed to post-traumatic and depressive symptoms. Our results also showed a significant effect of COVID-19 on IPD with a tendency of disease-experienced individuals to increase their preferred IPD from adults, children, and elderly people. Regarding gender differences in mood and proxemic behavior, a correlation between depressive symptoms and probable PTSD and a further correlation between probable PTSD and greater IPD were found in women from both clinical and control group. Overall, these findings might contribute to a better understanding of gender-based implications of the current pandemic on mental health, also leading to the development of integrated yet personalized intervention strategies.

Face masks reduce interpersonal distance in virtual reality

During the COVID-19 pandemic several behavioral measures have been implemented to reduce viral transmission. While these measures reduce the risk of infections, they may also increase risk behavior. Here, we experimentally investigate the influence of face masks on physical distancing. Eighty-four participants with or without face masks passed virtual agents in a supermarket environment to reach a target while interpersonal distance was recorded. Agents differed in wearing face masks and age (young, elderly). In addition, situational constraints varied in whether keeping a distance of 1.5 m required an effortful detour or not. Wearing face masks (both self and other) reduced physical distancing. This reduction was most prominent when keeping the recommended distance was effortful, suggesting an influence of situational constraints. Similarly, increased distances to elderly were only observed when keeping a recommended distance was effortless. These findings highlight contextual constraints in compensation behavior and have important implications for safety policies.

Contextual modulation of preferred social distance during the Covid-19 pandemic

Social distancing during a pandemic might be influenced by different attitudes: people may decide to reduce the risk and protect themselves from viral contagion, or they can opt to maintain their habits and be more exposed to the infection. To better understand the underlying motivating attitudes, we asked participants to indicate in an online platform the interpersonal distance from different social targets with professional/social behaviors considered more or less exposed to the virus. We selected five different social targets: a cohabitant, a friend working in a hospital, a friend landed from an international flight, a friend who is back from a cycling ride, or a stranger. In order to measure the realistic and the symbolic perceived threat, we administered the Brief 10-item COVID-19 threat scale. Moreover, in order to measure the risk attitude in different domains, the participants were also asked to fill in the Domain-Specific Risk-Taking DOSPERT scale. Results reveal a general preference for an increased distance from a stranger and the friends who are considered to be more exposed to the virus: the friend working in a hospital or landed from an international flight. Moreover, the interpersonal distance from friends is influenced by the perception of Realistic Threat measured through the Integrated Covid Threat Scale and the Health/Safety Risk Perception/Assumption as measured by the DOSPERT scale. Our results show the flexible and context-dependent nature of our representation of other people: as the social categories are not unchangeable fixed entities, the bodily (e.g., spatial) attitudes towards them are an object of continuous attunement.

Psychological and physiological evidence for an initial 'Rough Sketch' calculation of personal space

Personal space has been defined as “the area individuals maintain around themselves into which others cannot intrude without arousing discomfort”. However, the precise relationship between discomfort (or arousal) responses as a function of distance from an observer remains incompletely understood. Also the mechanisms involved in recognizing conspecifics and distinguishing them from other objects within personal space have not been identified. Accordingly, here we measured personal space preferences in response to real humans and human-like avatars (in virtual reality), using well-validated “stop distance” procedures. Based on threshold measurements of personal space, we examined within-subject variations in discomfort-related responses across multiple distances (spanning inside and outside each individual’s personal space boundary), as reflected by psychological (ratings) and physiological (skin conductance) responses to both humans and avatars. We found that the discomfort-by-distance functions for both humans and avatars were closely fit by a power law. These results suggest that the brain computation of visually-defined personal space begins with a ‘rough sketch’ stage, which generates responses to a broad range of human-like stimuli, in addition to humans. Analogous processing mechanisms may underlie other brain functions which respond similarly to both real and simulated human body parts.

Perceived Risk of Infection Linked to Changes in Comfort in Social Situations From Before to During the COVID-19 Pandemic

Background: Social lives have significantly changed since social distancing measures have been implemented to prevent the spread of the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). This study aimed to investigate how our appraisal of social situations changed during the pandemic. Methods: In two online surveys, conducted in October 2019 and April 2020, 58 participants rated their personal level of comfort for sketches depicting social situations. Situations were separately categorized according to the risk of a possible COVID-19 infection and changes in ratings were analyzed by using a repeated measures ANOVA. Moreover, potential influencing factors on the change in ratings such as perceived infection risk and social factors like regular frequency and liking of social interactions were examined. Results: There was a significant interaction (p < 0.001) between time of measurement and risk category. Comfort ratings of depicted situations with low and medium infection risk were higher during the second compared to the first survey period. Ratings of high-risk situations did not change significantly, although there was a tendency toward lower ratings during the pandemic. Multiple regression analyses showed that perceived probability of short-term infection could explain variance in the change of ratings of social situations with low- and medium risk, but not perceived probability of long-term infection or social factors. Conclusion: The results suggest that the change of participant's appraisal of the social situations during the COVID-19 pandemic relates to perceived infection risk. Both, the risk associated with the specific scenario as well as the general belief of short-term infection risk were associated with change. This change predominantly manifested in greater thought of comfort during low and medium risk situations, which might give a sense of safety during the pandemic. The finding that high-risk social situations were not rated as uncomfortable as expected must be considered with regard to the young sample and may not be generalizable to other individuals. Further research is necessary to evaluate long-term effects on social interactions caused by global pandemics such as the COVID-19 pandemic.

Physical distancing and the perception of interpersonal distance in the COVID-19 crisis

In the wake of the COVID-19 pandemic, it has been mandated to keep enlarged distances from others. We interviewed 136 German subjects over five weeks from the end of March to the end of April 2020 during the first wave of infections about their preferred interpersonal distance (IPD) before, during, and after the COVID-19 pandemic. In response to the pandemic, subjects adapted to distance requirements and preferred a larger IPD. This enlarged IPD was judged to partially persist after the pandemic crisis. People anticipated keeping more IPD to others even if there was no longer any risk of a SARS-CoV-2 infection. We also sampled two follow-up measurements, one in August, after the first wave of infections had been flattened, and one in October 2020, at the beginning of the second wave. Here, we observed that IPD varied with the incidence of SARS-CoV-2 within Germany. Overall, our data indicated that adaptation to distance requirements might happen asymmetrically. Preferred IPD rapidly adapted in response to distance requirements, but an enlargement of IPD may partially linger after the COVID-19 pandemic-crisis. We discuss our findings in light of proxemic theory and as an indicator for socio-cultural adaptation beyond the course of the pandemic.