er than cultural (Katz & Katz, 1983, p. 8). Although there is the danger of overgeneralizing too much when interpreting animal behavior in human terms, it does seem that the work of Hediger and Hall supports the idea that bodily spacing is innate. Hall would postulate that certain bodily distancing mechanisms are biological, which then become shaped in a rather sophisticated manner by the particular culture in which the person lives.
In the case of proxemics and its origins it would seem that the biological, neurological, innate forces would rank first in importance, followed by the experiences that are common to all members of the species. Last would be the intricate shaping of the particular culture. This is a most difficult judgment to call because all of these forces are quite powerful in determining the behavior of the person.
In my own life, it is not possible to really be aware of the neurological forces behind spacing decisions, because these are simply beyond what I think about on a daily basis. What I am aware of, particularly following this course of study, is that there are variations among men and women, among children of different ages, and among people in varieties of social, public and private situations. To add to the complexity is the understanding that there are various zones of relating to people. Hall cites four distinct zones which seem accurate to me--intimate distance, personal distance, social distance, and public distance (Fast, 1970, p. 30). I notice at parties and family gatherings that women seem to have closer spaces of comfort and that men are more protective. Young children are freer about invading the space of others, and girls are freer than boys.
In the area of kinesics, there has been controversy regarding whether or not there are common movements to all cultures. As long ago as 1872 Charles Darwin pointed out some similarities in the expressive movements of people from different ...