The influence of face mask on social spaces depends on the behavioral immune system

Abstract

Interacting with objects and people requires specifying localized spaces where these interactions can take place. Previous studies suggest that the space for interacting with objects (i.e., the peripersonal space) contributes to defining the space for interacting with people (i.e., personal and interpersonal spaces). Furthermore, situational factors, such as wearing a face mask, have been shown to influence social spaces, but how they influence the relation between action and social spaces and are modulated by individual factors is still not well understood. In this context, the present study investigated the relationship between action peripersonal and social personal and interpersonal spaces in participants approached by male and female virtual characters wearing or not wearing a face mask. We also measured individual factors related to the behavioral immune system, namely willingness to take risks, perceived infectability and germ aversion. The results showed that compared to peripersonal space, personal space was smaller and interpersonal space was larger, but the three spaces were positively correlated. All spaces were altered by gender, being shorter when participants faced female characters. Personal and interpersonal spaces were reduced with virtual characters wearing a face mask, especially in participants highly aversive to risks and germs. Altogether, these findings suggest that the regulation of the social spaces depends on the representation of action peripersonal space, but with an extra margin that is modulated by situational and personal factors in relation to the behavioral immune system.

Smaller preferred interpersonal distance for joint versus parallel action

“…The influence of Germ Aversion on preferred IPD is in keeping with the findings of Hromatko and colleagues observed during the early stages of the COVID-19 pandemic [ 51 ]. Similarly, Geers and Coello [ 50 ] found that individuals higher in Germ Aversion preferred to keep a greater distance from individuals who were not wearing a face mask. Perhaps surprisingly, the Perceived Infectability dimension turned out not to be a significant predictor of preferred IPD.…”

“…The second dimension of the PVD scale, namely Germ Aversion, was considered slightly less relevant because it focuses more on individuals’ concerns about potential pathogen transmission from objects previously touched by other people rather than on direct interaction. However, a study conducted during the early phase of the COVID-19 pandemic [ 40 ] indicated that people with greater fear of being contaminated by pathogens (as indicated by the Germ Aversion dimension of the PVD scale) showed greater COVID-related changes in peripersonal space, which is a different, but potentially related concept to IPD [ 6 ] (but see [ 50 ]). Thus, Germ Aversion might also predict preferred IPD.…”

The COVID-19 pandemic and changes in social behavior: Protective face masks reduce deliberate social distancing preferences while leaving automatic avoidance behavior unaffected

“…Previous research on the BIS found that people responded with increased disgust to contagion cues, such as skin rashes or sneezes, and quite readily initiated avoidance behavior in situations of increased contagion risk (Gassen et al, 2018 ; Keller et al, 2022 ; Mortensen et al, 2010 ). A virtual reality study further observed that personal and interpersonal spaces were reduced with virtual characters wearing a face mask, especially in persons highly aversive to contagion risks (Geers & Coello, 2022 ). During the peak waves of the pandemic in 2020 and 2021, unmasked strangers, and even those without visible sickness cues, were most likely perceived as potentially contagious, given that even asymptomatic infections of COVID-19 are easily transmissible (Moghadas et al, 2020 ).…”