Interpersonal Distance in Immersive Virtual Environments

Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin - Tập 29 Số 7 - Trang 819-833 - 2003
Jeremy N. Bailenson1, Jim Blascovich2, Andrew C. Beall2, Jack M. Loomis2
1University of California, Santa Barbara, CA 93106, USA
2University of California, Santa Barbara

Tóm tắt

Digital immersive virtual environment technology (IVET) enables behavioral scientists to conduct ecologically realistic experiments with near-perfect experimental control. The authors employed IVET to study the interpersonal distance maintained between participants and virtual humans. In Study 1, participants traversed a three-dimensional virtual room in which a virtual human stood. In Study 2, a virtual human approached participants. In both studies, participant gender, virtual human gender, virtual human gaze behavior, and whether virtual humans were allegedly controlled by humans (i.e., avatars) or computers (i.e., agents) were varied. Results indicated that participants maintained greater distance from virtual humans when approaching their fronts compared to their backs. In addition, participants gave more personal space to virtual agents who engaged them in mutual gaze. Moreover, when virtual humans invaded their personal space, participants moved farthest from virtual human agents. The advantages and disadvantages of IVET for the study of human behavior are discussed.

Từ khóa


Tài liệu tham khảo

10.1111/j.1468-2958.1998.tb00429.x

Argyle, M. (1988). Bodily communication (2nd ed.). London: Methuen.

10.2307/2786027

10.1002/vis.276

Bailenson, J. N., Beall, A. C., Blascovich, J., Weisbuch, M. & Raimmundo, R. (2001). Intelligent agents who wear your face: Users' reactions to the virtual self. Lecture Notes in Artificial Intelligence, 2190, 86-99.

10.1162/105474601753272844

Biocca, F. & Levy, M. (1995). Communication in the age of virtual reality. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.

Blascovich, J. (2001). Social influences within immersive virtual environments. In R. Schroeder (Ed.), The social life of avatars (pp. 127-145). New York: Springer-Verlag.

Blascovich, J. (2002). A theoretical model of social influence for increasing the utility of collaborative virtual environments. CVE 2002: Proceedings of the 4th International Conference on Collaborative Virtual Environments, 25-30.

10.1207/S15327965PLI1302_01

10.1111/j.2044-8260.1978.tb00254.x

Burgoon, J. K., Stern, L. & Dillman, L. (1995). Interpersonal adaptation. Dyadic interaction patterns. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

DeFanti, T. (2000). Better than being there: Next millennium networks. IEEE, 20, 60-63.

Gibson, W. (1984). Neuromancer. New York: Ace Books.

Gifford, R. (1996). Environmental psychology (2nd ed.). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

10.1007/BF01434994

10.1007/BF00985984

Hall, J. A. (1984). Nonverbal sex differences: Accuracy of communication and expressive style. Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press.

10.1037/0033-2909.94.2.293

Hebl, M. R. & Kleck, R. E. (2002). Virtually interactive: A new paradigm for the analysis of stigma. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 128-131.

10.1037/0022-3514.35.5.315

Krikorian, D. H., Lee, J., Chock, T. M. & Harms, C. (2000). Isn't that spatial? Distance and communication in a 2-D virtual Environment. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication [online], 4.

10.3758/BF03200735

10.1111/j.1468-2958.1995.tb00354.x

10.1111/j.1460-2466.1967.tb01190.x

10.1207/S15324834BASP2401_5

Reeves, B. & Nass, C. (1996). The media equation: How people treat computers, television, and new media like real people and places. New York: Cambridge University Press.

10.2466/pms.1972.35.2.519

10.1162/105474600566600

Sommer, R. (2002). Personal space in a digital age. In R. B. Bechtel & A. Churchman (Eds.), Handbook of environmental psychology (pp. 647-660). New York: John Wiley.

10.1037/0022-3514.79.5.748

Zebrowitz, L. A. (2002). The affordances of IVET for studying social affordances. Psychological Inquiry, 13, 143-145.