Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item:
Crosscultural variations in territoriality: a baseline determination of interactional distance between shared culture dyads
|uhm_phd_7009972_uh.pdf||Version for UH users||3.18 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
|uhm_phd_7009972_r.pdf||Version for non-UH users. Copying/Printing is not permitted||3.21 MB||Adobe PDF||View/Open|
|Title:||Crosscultural variations in territoriality: a baseline determination of interactional distance between shared culture dyads|
|Authors:||Engebretson, Darold Edward|
|Abstract:||Interaction distance between dyads was investigated as a function of relationship, sex, conversational content, and culture. The subjects (Ss) were Native Japanese (NJ), Hawaii Japanese (HJ), and American Caucasians (C). The minimum sample size within culture by sex was 24, with Total Nm=155. The instrument for eliciting distance was a modification of Kuethe1s (1962) Felt Figure free placement technique. Six scenes of interaction were presented to each S with the order of presentations counterbalanced across Ss. Testing was done primarily in a group setting. Distances between silhouettes were measured in twelfths of an inch. The primary statistical test was ANOVA with 2 Within Ss variables (Conversational Content and Relationship) and 2 Between Ss variables (Culture and Sex). Of the four variables analyzed, relationship was the most powerful determinant of interaction distance. Culture was also significant, but conversational content and sex were not. No interaction effects reached significance. As predicted, NJ had greater interaction distances than either HJ or C. However, no differences were found between HJ and C which was contrary to anticipated results. Since HJ were primarily of the third generation acculturation is presumed to be the explanation for this result. Sex differences among the NJ and C were not significant as predicted. The hypothesis of greater distances for HJ males was not supported. Previous studies had indicated a more rapid rate of acculturation for HJ females, but this research would tend to refute that finding, at least with the population under present study.'NJ and HJ held the same increasing order of distances across relationship: friend, father, professor. No sex differences were found on distance with authority figures for C. nor were there differences between authority figures for the same cultural group. Conversational content was not a significant determinant of distance. It was asserted that relationship between persons is more important than the content shared in the interaction. Perceived cultural influence was measured by a modification of Kilpatrick's Self-Anchoring Scale tor the HJ and C groups. Previous research had Indicated a more traditional stance for the HJ male, but no sex differences were found in the present study. As predicted, no sex differences were found within C. HJ and C were significantly different on this measure as hypothesized. A final analysis was made on the correlation between perceived cultural influence and interaction distance. Only two correlations were significant and they were deemed spurious. Since HJ and C were not significantly different on interaction distance, the expressed difference on perceived cultural influence would seem to be a comment on the myth of cultural difference held by these groups in Hawaii.|
Thesis (Ph. D.)--University of Hawaii, 1969.
Bibliography: leaves 121-126.
ix, 126 l illus
|Rights:||All UHM dissertations and theses are protected by copyright. They may be viewed from this source for any purpose, but reproduction or distribution in any format is prohibited without written permission from the copyright owner.|
|Appears in Collections:||Ph.D. - Educational Psychology|
Items in ScholarSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.