{"title":"我们的社会疏离做得如何?","authors":"Naohide Yamamoto, Mia Nightingale","doi":"10.1177/17470218231195247","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many jurisdictions around the world introduced a \"social distance\" rule under which people are instructed to keep a certain distance from others. Generally, this rule is implemented simply by telling people how many metres or feet of separation should be kept, without giving them precise instructions as to how the specified distance can be measured. Consequently, the rule is effective only to the extent that people are able to gauge this distance through their space perception. To examine the effectiveness of the rule from this point of view, this study empirically investigated how much distance people would leave from another person when they relied on their perception of this distance. Participants (<i>N</i> = 153) were asked to stand exactly 1.5 m away from a researcher, and resultant interpersonal distances showed that while their mean was close to the correct 1.5 m distance, they exhibited large individual differences. These results suggest that a number of people would not stay sufficiently away from others even when they intend to do proper social distancing. Given this outcome, it is suggested that official health advice include measures that compensate for this tendency.</p>","PeriodicalId":20869,"journal":{"name":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","volume":" ","pages":"1106-1112"},"PeriodicalIF":1.5000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11032622/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"How well do we do social distancing?\",\"authors\":\"Naohide Yamamoto, Mia Nightingale\",\"doi\":\"10.1177/17470218231195247\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many jurisdictions around the world introduced a \\\"social distance\\\" rule under which people are instructed to keep a certain distance from others. Generally, this rule is implemented simply by telling people how many metres or feet of separation should be kept, without giving them precise instructions as to how the specified distance can be measured. Consequently, the rule is effective only to the extent that people are able to gauge this distance through their space perception. To examine the effectiveness of the rule from this point of view, this study empirically investigated how much distance people would leave from another person when they relied on their perception of this distance. Participants (<i>N</i> = 153) were asked to stand exactly 1.5 m away from a researcher, and resultant interpersonal distances showed that while their mean was close to the correct 1.5 m distance, they exhibited large individual differences. These results suggest that a number of people would not stay sufficiently away from others even when they intend to do proper social distancing. Given this outcome, it is suggested that official health advice include measures that compensate for this tendency.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":20869,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"1106-1112\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":1.5000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11032622/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"102\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231195247\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"心理学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2023/8/24 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q4\",\"JCRName\":\"PHYSIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Quarterly Journal of Experimental Psychology","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/17470218231195247","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/24 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"PHYSIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
During the pandemic of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), many jurisdictions around the world introduced a "social distance" rule under which people are instructed to keep a certain distance from others. Generally, this rule is implemented simply by telling people how many metres or feet of separation should be kept, without giving them precise instructions as to how the specified distance can be measured. Consequently, the rule is effective only to the extent that people are able to gauge this distance through their space perception. To examine the effectiveness of the rule from this point of view, this study empirically investigated how much distance people would leave from another person when they relied on their perception of this distance. Participants (N = 153) were asked to stand exactly 1.5 m away from a researcher, and resultant interpersonal distances showed that while their mean was close to the correct 1.5 m distance, they exhibited large individual differences. These results suggest that a number of people would not stay sufficiently away from others even when they intend to do proper social distancing. Given this outcome, it is suggested that official health advice include measures that compensate for this tendency.
期刊介绍:
Promoting the interests of scientific psychology and its researchers, QJEP, the journal of the Experimental Psychology Society, is a leading journal with a long-standing tradition of publishing cutting-edge research. Several articles have become classic papers in the fields of attention, perception, learning, memory, language, and reasoning. The journal publishes original articles on any topic within the field of experimental psychology (including comparative research). These include substantial experimental reports, review papers, rapid communications (reporting novel techniques or ground breaking results), comments (on articles previously published in QJEP or on issues of general interest to experimental psychologists), and book reviews. Experimental results are welcomed from all relevant techniques, including behavioural testing, brain imaging and computational modelling.
QJEP offers a competitive publication time-scale. Accepted Rapid Communications have priority in the publication cycle and usually appear in print within three months. We aim to publish all accepted (but uncorrected) articles online within seven days. Our Latest Articles page offers immediate publication of articles upon reaching their final form.
The journal offers an open access option called Open Select, enabling authors to meet funder requirements to make their article free to read online for all in perpetuity. Authors also benefit from a broad and diverse subscription base that delivers the journal contents to a world-wide readership. Together these features ensure that the journal offers authors the opportunity to raise the visibility of their work to a global audience.