Cargando…
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 tha...
Autores principales: | , |
---|---|
Formato: | Online Artículo Texto |
Lenguaje: | English |
Publicado: |
Nature Publishing Group UK
2023
|
Materias: | |
Acceso en línea: | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10174619/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37169840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-34667-x |
_version_ | 1785040073048195072 |
---|---|
author | Kühne, Katharina Jeglinski-Mende, M. A. |
author_facet | Kühne, Katharina Jeglinski-Mende, M. A. |
author_sort | Kühne, Katharina |
collection | PubMed |
description | 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. |
format | Online Article Text |
id | pubmed-10174619 |
institution | National Center for Biotechnology Information |
language | English |
publishDate | 2023 |
publisher | Nature Publishing Group UK |
record_format | MEDLINE/PubMed |
spelling | pubmed-101746192023-05-13 Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19 Kühne, Katharina Jeglinski-Mende, M. A. Sci Rep Article 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. Nature Publishing Group UK 2023-05-11 /pmc/articles/PMC10174619/ /pubmed/37169840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-34667-x Text en © The Author(s) 2023 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/Open Access This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons licence, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article's Creative Commons licence, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article's Creative Commons licence and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this licence, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/ (https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) . |
spellingShingle | Article Kühne, Katharina Jeglinski-Mende, M. A. Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19 |
title | Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19 |
title_full | Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19 |
title_fullStr | Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19 |
title_full_unstemmed | Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19 |
title_short | Refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during COVID-19 |
title_sort | refraining from interaction can decrease fear of physical closeness during covid-19 |
topic | Article |
url | https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10174619/ https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/37169840 http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/s41598-023-34667-x |
work_keys_str_mv | AT kuhnekatharina refrainingfrominteractioncandecreasefearofphysicalclosenessduringcovid19 AT jeglinskimendema refrainingfrominteractioncandecreasefearofphysicalclosenessduringcovid19 |