The psychological environment: consumer behaviour and personal space

Psychology A2 · Consumer Psychology. The idea in plain words, the rules to remember, the mistake to avoid and a worked example, written and checked by Mega Lecture.

Test this topic free All Psychology A2 topics

The idea

Personal space is the invisible area around a person that others are expected not to enter. Hall described four zones: intimate, personal, social and public. When a stranger comes too close, three ideas explain the discomfort: overload (too much stimulation), arousal (the body becomes tense and alert) and behaviour constraint (loss of freedom to move or act).

The key study, Robson et al. (2011), tested how the spacing of restaurant tables affects diners.

A queue is also a space people defend. It is a small social system with a first-come, first-served rule. Milgram et al. (1986) studied what happens when someone pushes in.

Rules to remember

Hall's zones: intimate 0 to 45 cm; personal 45 cm to 1.2 m; social 1.2 to 3.6 m; public over 3.6 m.
Robson et al. (2011): online questionnaire with over 1,000 American adults, who saw pictures of tables for two set 6, 12 or 24 inches apart and imagined a dining situation.
Robson result: closely spaced tables made people feel more stressed, less private and less in control, most strongly for a romantic meal.
Robson conclusion: tight spacing fits more tables in but may reduce comfort and return visits.
Milgram et al. (1986): field experiment in real queues in New York; one or two confederates pushed in and observers recorded reactions.
Milgram result: two intruders brought more objections than one; most objections came from people directly behind the intruder; 'buffer' confederates who did not object reduced objections.
Responses to intrusion: verbal (objecting), non-verbal (glaring, gesturing), occasionally physical; many people did nothing.

Common mistake

Saying Robson et al. observed real diners in a restaurant. Participants only looked at pictures and answered an online questionnaire, so ecological validity is a weakness.

Worked example

Someone pushes into a ticket queue behind the fourth person. Using Milgram et al. (1986), who is most likely to object, and why?

The intruder delays everyone behind the point of entry, not those in front.
The person directly behind is nearest and is seen as responsible for defending that spot.
Milgram et al. found most objections came from those immediately behind the intruder.
So the fifth person in the original queue is the most likely to object.

Answer: The person directly behind the intruder (the fifth in line), because they lose most and are expected to defend the place.

Ask about this

Type what you are stuck on. The helper finds the explanation, worked examples and the notes to read, free and instant.

Keep going

← The psychological environment: menu design psychology Consumer decision-making: models and strategies →Take a Psychology A2 test