Cited by 128Action Observation and SynchronizationEmbodied and Extended CognitionNeuroendocrine regulation and behavior

The space between us: a neurophilosophical framework for the investigation of human interpersonal space

Lloyd, Donna M.·2009·Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews

Abstract

Despite a plethora of knowledge, both behavioural and neural, of the mechanisms defining space around a singular body little is known about the neural mechanisms that encode space between bodies. Yet, the space between people creates and defines the social dynamics of our interactions with others. This review brings together evidence from social psychology, which considers individuals and their interactions as whole beings, with neuroscientific evidence of the factors involved in spatial coding to propose a framework by which we can investigate and interpret the neural substrates of 'social space'. A key feature of this framework is that space around the body is defined from a functional 'action-centred' perspective; the same underlying processes mediate interactions with both inanimate and animate objects, with links to emotive and motivational systems encoding the saliency of those interactions. The investigation of the neural mechanisms underlying interpersonal space is timely given the increasing density of our populations and can provide a richer interpretation of findings from neuroimaging studies of prosocial behaviour which may further insights into populations with social dysfunction.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.neubiorev.2008.09.007

Cites

106 of 106 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Perceived threat from others is considered one of the most salient factors mediating the equilibrium between interpersonal distance and social interaction.

    “Perceived threat from others is considered to be one of the most salient factors in mediating the equilibrium between interpersonal distance and social interaction (Lloyd, 2009).”

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lloyd, D. M.
Affiliations
University of Manchester (GB)
Corresponding author
Lloyd, Donna M.
Venue
Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2009-03
Volume
33
Issue
3
Pages
297-304
ISSN
0149-7634 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2104761373
Cited by
128
References
105
Citations by year
2026: 5 · 2025: 9 · 2024: 12 · 2023: 8 · 2022: 11 · 2021: 18 · 2020: 11 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 7 · 2017: 11 · 2016: 7 · 2015: 5 · 2014: 6 · 2013: 7 · 2012: 6
FWCI
1.78
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Neuroscience & Biobehavioral Reviews (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
  • Research Explorer (The University of Manchester) (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Action Observation and Synchronization
  • Life Sciences › Neuroscience › Cognitive Neuroscience › Embodied and Extended Cognition
  • Social Sciences › Psychology › Social Psychology › Neuroendocrine regulation and behavior
Keywords
personal space, social space, spatial coding, prosocial behavior, social dysfunction, salience, neurophilosophy
MeSH terms
Animals, Brain, Humans, Interpersonal Relations, Magnetic Resonance Imaging, Models, Psychological, Neurons, Personal Space, Social Behavior, Spatial Behavior

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review