social distance


Also found in: Dictionary, Thesaurus, Legal, Encyclopedia, Wikipedia.

social distance

Psychology A zone of space in which most social interactions occur; SDs may be 1. Close–2.5 m–12-25 feet, which corresponds to informal situations, in which one–or more persons are 'in control', as in a teacher talking to students in a classroom, or a manager addressing subordinate and 2. Far–> 8m or >25 feet, which corresponds to 'formal' distances, such as in lectures, political rallies, etc. See Proxemics. Cf Intimate distance, Personal distance, Public distance.
References in periodicals archive ?
What is the average social distance between teachers and representatives of different ethnicities and faiths?
To determine the social distance of others, participants were asked to complete the Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale (Aron, Aron, & Smollan, 1992), in which the overlap of two circles reflects the social distance between self and others, by filling in the name or initials of their closest other and their most distant other (separately).
where v is the discounted reward value, N is social distance. V is the undiscounted reward value at social distance (N) = 0, and s is a constant measuring social discounting rate, s-values closer to 0 indicate shallower discounting, or relatively more sharing.
Social distance thus affects receptivity to and support for new ideas, but especially within closed systems of strong ties and restricted flows of novel information that may blind one to alternative possibilities (Granovetter 1973).
Similarly, there was a significant relationship between disability scores and social participation restrictions, a tendency of keeping a social distance and negative attitudes from the community member.
The social distance attitudes scale measured how much people wished to avoid social interaction with schizophrenic patients (Lauber et al., 2004; Link et al., 1999; van 't Veer, Kraan, Drosseart, & Modde, 2006).
For both depression and schizophrenia vignettes, both student and adult participants had a significantly higher mean social distance score (i.e.
H2: Different social distances had significant impact on short-sighted consuming intentions, and compared with far social distance, the short-sighted consuming intentions in close social distance are stronger.
Out of the three particles, lah and leh can be used to perform both the functions of reducing as well as increasing social distance.
The results of paired t tests were significant for every comparison of means between self and others in different social distances. The closest social distance (i.e., people like you) measured in this study resulted in a significant self-other perceptual disparity.
Variables like social distance (Scollon and Scollon 1995) and affect (Spencer-Oatey 2000) were considered as potential factors impacting both on the use of impoliteness types and on the linguistic devices used to convey each type.
In Table 2, regarding Social Distance Scale there is no significant difference in the overall and item-wise means of the exposed and unexposed students; however regarding item no.4 and 5 has means more than 1.5 which is neutral value indicating that there is tendency towards negative attitude towards mental illness.