The DOI matches its Crossref record; 35 of the 35 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Proxemics [and Comments and Replies]
Abstract
Virtually everything that man is and does is associated with space. Man's sense of space is a synthesis of many sensory inputs: visual, auditory, kinesthetic, olfactory, and thermal. Not only does each of these constitute a complex system (as for example, the dozen or more different ways of experiencing depth visually), but each is molded and patterned by culture. Hence people reared in different cultures live in different sensory worlds. What is more, they are generally unaware of the degree to which the worlds may differ. From the study of culture we learn that the patterning of perceptual worlds is a function not only of the specific culture but of the relationship, activity, and emotions present in a given situation. Therefore, when two people of different cultures interact, each uses different criteria to interpret the other's behavior, and each may easily misinterpret the relationship, the activity, or the emotions involved. The study of culture in the proxemic sense is the study of peoples' use of their perceptual apparatus in different emotional states during different activities, in different relationships, settings, and contexts. No single research technique is sufficient in scope to investigate this complex, multi-dimensional subject. The research technique is, therefore, a function of the particular facet under examination at the time and many call for the involvement of many disciplines. Like all basic studies of the communicative process, proxemics, as I think of it, is more concerned with how than why, and more concerned with structure than content. The work is admittedly detailed and is apt to be routine. It addresses itself to basic human situations in an area of culture that is ordinarily hidden from conscious awareness. For this reason, proxemics frequently leads to new insights about specific cultures, as well as to insights into the generalized concept of culture itself. In formulating my thinking concerning proxemics, I have maintained that culture is an extension of basic biological processes. While man's extensions as they evolve may mask the underlying relationships which maintain the equilibrium of biological systems, the relationships and systems are no less real by virtue of being hidden. In the words of Ian McHarg (1963): ...no species can exist without an environment, no species can exist in an environment of its exclusive creation, no species can survive, save as a nondisruptive member of an ecological community. Every member must adjust to other members of the community and to the environment in order to survive. Man is not excluded from this test.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Hall, E. T. (1973) · Leonardo · doi:10.2307/1572461 · Cited by 4,859
Self-citationLanguage, Thought, and Reality.
Halpern, A. M., Whorf, B. L., Carroll, J. B., & Chase, S. (1956) · American Sociological Review · doi:10.2307/2089121 · Cited by 2,856
A COURSE IN MODERN LINGUISTICS
Hockett, C. F. (1958) · Language Learning · doi:10.1111/j.1467-1770.1958.tb00870.x · Cited by 2,080
Eye-Contact, Distance and Affiliation
Argyle, M., & Dean, J. (1965) · Sociometry · doi:10.2307/2786027 · Cited by 1,779
Hockett, C. F. (1960) · PubMed · Cited by 1,190
The Status of Linguistics as a Science
Sapir, E. (1929) · Language · doi:10.1017/409588 · Cited by 1,162
The linguistic sciences and language teaching
Halliday, M. A. K., McIntosh, A., & Strevens, P. (1964) · Medical Entomology and Zoology · Cited by 1,118
A System for the Notation of Proxemic Behavior1
HALL, E. T. (1963) · American Anthropologist · doi:10.1525/aa.1963.65.5.02a00020 · Cited by 1,006
Self-citationModels and Metaphors: Studies in Language and Philosophy.
Sacksteder, W., & Black, M. (1962) · Philosophy and Phenomenological Research · doi:10.2307/2104931 · Cited by 821
How we know universals the perception of auditory and visual forms
Pitts, W., & McCulloch, W. S. (1947) · The Bulletin of Mathematical Biophysics · doi:10.1007/bf02478291 · Cited by 799
Cited by
How Robots Influence Humans: A Survey of Nonverbal Communication in Social Human–Robot Interaction
Saunderson, S., & Nejat, G. (2019) · International Journal of Social Robotics · doi:10.1007/s12369-019-00523-0 · Cited by 325
The effect of postural lean and body congruence on the judgment of psychotherapeutic rapport.
Trout, D. L., & Rosenfeld, H. M. (1980) · Journal of Nonverbal Behavior · doi:10.1007/bf00986818 · Cited by 135
Designing Ethical Social Robots—A Longitudinal Field Study With Older Adults
van Maris, A., Zook, N., Caleb-Solly, P., Studley, M., Winfield, A., & Dogramadzi, S. (2020) · Frontiers in Robotics and AI · doi:10.3389/frobt.2020.00001 · Cited by 91
Leeds‐Hurwitz, W. (1987) · Research on Language and Social Interaction · doi:10.1080/08351818709389274 · Cited by 46
Nonverbal Communication and Counseling/Psychotherapy: A Review
Gladstein, G. A. (1974) · The Counseling Psychologist · doi:10.1177/001100007400400307 · Cited by 44
Metadata
- Authors
- Hall, E. T., Birdwhistell, R. L., Bock, B., Bohannan, P., Diebold, Durbin, M., Edmonson, M. S., Fischer, J. L., Hymes, D., Kimball, S. T., La Barre, W., McClellan, J. E., Marshall, D. S., Milner, G. B., Sarles, H. B., Trager, G. L., & Vayda, A. P.
- Venue
- Current Anthropology
- Publisher
- University of Chicago Press
- Published
- 1968-04
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 2/3
- Pages
- 83-108
- ISSN
- 0011-3204 (ISSN-L)
- 1537-5382
- OpenAlex
- W2292220267
- Cited by
- 678
- References
- 35
- FWCI
- 43.61
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Proxemics [and Comments and Replies]. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1086/200975
- The paper
- Hall, E. T., Birdwhistell, R. L., Bock, B., Bohannan, P., Diebold, Durbin, M., Edmonson, M. S., Fischer, J. L., Hymes, D., Kimball, S. T., La Barre, W., McClellan, J. E., Marshall, D. S., Milner, G. B., Sarles, H. B., Trager, G. L., & Vayda, A. P. (1968). Proxemics [and Comments and Replies]. Current Anthropology. https://doi.org/10.1086/200975
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.