Editing Social distance

{{Short description|Sociological concept of distance between groups in society}}
{{About|the term in sociology|the public health measures|Social distancing|the Netflix series|Social Distance (TV series)}}
{{pp-vandalism|small=yes}}
In sociology, '''social distance''' describes the [[distance#Theoretical distances|distance]] between individuals or [[social groups]] in [[society]], including dimensions such as [[social class]], [[Race (classification of human beings)|race]]/[[ethnicity]], [[gender]] or [[human sexuality|sexuality]]. Members of different groups mix less than members of the same group. It is the measure of nearness or intimacy that an individual or group feels towards another individual or group in a social network or the level of trust one group has for another and the extent of perceived likeness of beliefs.<ref>Boguna, Marian, Romualdo Pastor-Satorras, Albert Díaz-Guilera, and Alex Arenas (2004).
Models of social networks based on social distance attachment. Physical Review, 70, 1–8.
</ref><ref>Helfgott, Jacqueline B. & Gunnison, Elaine (2008). The influence of social distance on
community corrections officer perceptions of offender reentry needs. Federal Probation,
72(1), 2–12.
</ref>

== History ==
Modern research into social distance is primarily attributed to work by sociologist [[Georg Simmel]].<ref name=":1">{{Cite journal|last1=Levine|first1=Donald N.|last2=Carter|first2=Ellwood B.|last3=Gorman|first3=Eleanor Miller|date=January 1976|title=Simmel's Influence on American Sociology. I|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/226143|journal=American Journal of Sociology|volume=81|issue=4|pages=813–845|doi=10.1086/226143|s2cid=144041956|issn=0002-9602|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":2">{{Cite book|last=Bligh|first=Michelle C.|editor1-first=Michelle C|editor1-last=Bligh|editor2-first=Ronald E|editor2-last=Riggio|date=2012-09-10|title=Exploring Distance in Leader-Follower Relationships|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9780203120637|doi=10.4324/9780203120637|isbn=9780203120637}}</ref> Simmel's conceptualization of social distance was represented in his writings about a hypothetical [[The Stranger (sociology)|stranger]] that was simultaneously near and far from contact with his social group.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":32">{{Cite journal|last=Ethington|first=Philip J.|date=1997-09-16|title=The Intellectual Construction of "Social Distance": Toward a Recovery of Georg Simmel's Social Geometry|journal=Cybergeo|doi=10.4000/cybergeo.227|issn=1278-3366|doi-access=free}}</ref>

Simmel's lectures on the topic were attended by [[Robert E. Park|Robert Park]],<ref name=":03">{{Cite journal|last1=Wark|first1=Colin|last2=Galliher|first2=John F.|date=December 2007|title=Emory Bogardus and the Origins of the Social Distance Scale|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s12108-007-9023-9|journal=The American Sociologist|volume=38|issue=4|pages=383–395|doi=10.1007/s12108-007-9023-9|issn=0003-1232|s2cid=144049507|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":32"/> who later extended Simmel's ideas to the study of relations across racial/ethnic groups.<ref name=":03"/><ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> At the time, racial tensions in the US at the time had brought intergroup relations to the forefront of academic interest.<ref name=":03"/><ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" /> Robert Park tasked his student, [[Emory S. Bogardus|Emory Bogardus]], to create a quantifiable measure of social distance.<ref name=":32"/> Bogardus' creation of the first [[Bogardus social distance scale|Social Distance Scale]] played a large role in popularizing Park's and Bogardus conceptualization of social distance, which had some significant differences from Simmel's original ideas.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":32"/><ref name=":2" />

Contemporary studies of social distance do exhibit some features of a cohesive body of literature, but the definitions and frameworks sometimes show significant variations across researchers and disciplines.<ref name=":1" /><ref name=":2" />

== Dimensions ==
Nedim Karakayali put forth a framework that described four dimensions of social distance:<ref name=":2" /><ref name="test">Karakayali, Nedim. 2009. "Social Distance and Affective Orientations." ''Sociological Forum'', vol. 23, n.3, pp. 538–562.</ref>

# '''Affective social distance''': One widespread view of social distance is [[negative affectivity|affectivity]]. Social distance is associated with affective distance, i.e. how much sympathy the members of a group feel for another group. [[Emory Bogardus]], the creator of "Bogardus social distance scale" was typically basing his scale on this [[subjectivity|subjective-affective]] conception of social distance: "[i]n social distance studies the center of attention is on the feeling reactions of persons toward other persons and toward groups of people."<ref>Bogardus, E. S. 1947. ''Measurement of Personal-Group Relations,'' ''Sociometry'', 10: 4: 306–311.</ref>
# '''Normative social distance''': A second approach views social distance as a [[social norm|normative]] category. Normative social distance refers to the widely accepted and often consciously expressed norms about who should be considered as an [[ingroup|"insider"]] and who an [[Outgroup (sociology)|"outsider/foreigner".]] Such norms, in other words, specify the distinctions between "us" and "them". Therefore, normative social distance differs from affective social distance, because it conceives social distance is conceived as a [[Objectivity (science)|non-subjective]], [[social structure|structural]] aspect of social relations. Examples of this conception can be found in some of the works of sociologists such as [[Georg Simmel]], [[Emile Durkheim]] and to some extent [[Robert E. Park|Robert Park]].
# '''Interactive social distance''': Focuses on the frequency and intensity of interactions between two groups, claiming that the more the members of two groups interact, the closer they are socially. This conception is similar to the approaches in [[social network|sociological network]] theory, where the frequency of interaction between two parties is used as a measure of the "strength" of the social ties between them.
# '''Cultural and habitual distance''': Focuses cultural and habitual which is proposed by Bourdieu (1990). This type of distance is influenced by the "capital" people possess.

It is possible to view these different conceptions as "dimensions" of social distance, that do not necessarily overlap. The members of two groups might interact with each other quite frequently, but this does not always mean that they will feel "close" to each other or that normatively they will consider each other as the members of the same group. In other words, interactive, normative and affective dimensions of social distance might not be linearly associated.<ref name="test" />

==Measurement==
Some ways social distance can be [[measurement|measured]] include: direct observation of people interacting, questionnaires, speeded decision making tasks, route planning exercises, or other social drawing tasks (see [[sociogram]]).

Bogardus Social Distance Scale and its variations remain the most popular measure of social distance.<ref name=":32"/><ref name=":03"/> In questionnaires based on Bogardus' scale, respondents are typically asked members of which groups they would accept in particular relationships. For example, to check whether or not they would accept a member of each group as a neighbor, as a fellow worker as a marriage partner. The social distance questionnaires may not accurately measure what people actually would do if a member of another group sought to become a friend or neighbour. The social distance scale is only an attempt to measure one's feeling of unwillingness to associate equally with a group. What a person will actually do in a situation also depends upon the circumstances of the situation.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://www.sociologyguide.com/basic-concepts/Social-Distance.php|title = Social Distance, Basic Concepts of Sociology Guide}}</ref>

== Theoretical implications ==

=== Psychological distance ===
Some researchers have examined social distance as a form of [[psychological distance]].<ref name=":15"/><ref name=":7">{{Cite journal|last1=Stephan|first1=Elena|last2=Liberman|first2=Nira|last3=Trope|first3=Yaacov|date=2010|title=Politeness and psychological distance: A construal level perspective.|url= |journal=Journal of Personality and Social Psychology|volume=98|issue=2|pages=268–280|doi=10.1037/a0016960|pmid=20085400|pmc=3193988|issn=1939-1315}}</ref><ref name=":43">{{Cite journal|last1=Magee|first1=Joe C.|last2=Smith|first2=Pamela K.|date=2013-01-24|title=The Social Distance Theory of Power|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1088868312472732|journal=Personality and Social Psychology Review|volume=17|issue=2|pages=158–186|doi=10.1177/1088868312472732|issn=1088-8683|pmid=23348983|s2cid=40262039|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Research in this vein has drawn connections between social distance, other kinds of psychological distance (such as temporal distance).<ref name=":6">{{Cite journal|last1=Stephan|first1=Elena|last2=Liberman|first2=Nira|last3=Trope|first3=Yaacov|date=March 2011|title=The effects of time perspective and level of construal on social distance|url= |journal=Journal of Experimental Social Psychology|volume=47|issue=2|pages=397–402|doi=10.1016/j.jesp.2010.11.001|pmid=21836728|pmc=3153444|issn=0022-1031}}</ref><ref name=":7"/> This type of work also examined the effect of social distance on [[Construal level theory|construal levels]], suggesting that greater social distance promotes high-level and increase cognitive abstraction.<ref name=":6" /><ref name=":7" />

In speeded decision making tasks, studies have suggested a systematic relationship between social distance and physical distance. When asked to either indicate the spatial location of a presented word or verify a word's presence, people respond more quickly when "we" was displayed in a spatially proximate versus spatially distant location and when "others" was displayed in a
spatially distant versus a spatially proximate location.<ref>Bar-Anan, Y., Liberman, N., Trope, Y., & Algom, D. (2007). Automatic processing of psychological distance: Evidence from a Stroop task. ''Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 136,'' 610–622.</ref> This suggests that social distance and physical distance are conceptually related.

Route planning exercises have also hinted at a conceptual link between social distance and physical distance. When asked to draw a route on a map, people tend to draw routes closer to friends they pass along the way and further away from strangers.<ref>Matthews, J.L. & Matlock, T. (2011). Understanding the link between spatial distance and social distance. ''Social Psychology, 42'', 185–192. {{doi|10.1027/1864-9335/a000062}}</ref> This effect is robust even after controlling for how easy it is for the people passing one another to communicate.

There is some evidence that reasoning about social distance and physical distance draw on shared processing resources in the human parietal cortex.<ref>Yamakawa, Y., Kanai, R., Matsumura, M., & Naito, E. (2009). Social distance evaluation in human parietal cortex. PLoS ONE, 4(2): e4360. {{doi|10.1371/journal.pone.0004360}}</ref>

== Practical implications ==

===Prejudice===
Social distance can emerge between groups that differ on a variety of dimensions, including culture, race/ethnicity, and socioeconomic class.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Hipp|first1=John R.|last2=Perrin|first2=Andrew J.|date=March 2009|title=The Simultaneous Effect of Social Distance and Physical Distance on the Formation of Neighborhood Ties|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1540-6040.2009.01267.x|journal=City & Community|volume=8|issue=1|pages=5–25|doi=10.1111/j.1540-6040.2009.01267.x|s2cid=54556334|issn=1535-6841}}</ref> Construal level theory suggests that greater social distance can contribute to a reliance on stereotypes when evaluating socially distant individuals/groups.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Kim|first1=Kyeongheui|last2=Zhang|first2=Meng|last3=Li|first3=Xiuping|date=December 2008|title=Effects of Temporal and Social Distance on Consumer Evaluations: Table 1|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1086/592131|journal=Journal of Consumer Research|volume=35|issue=4|pages=706–713|doi=10.1086/592131|issn=0093-5301|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

The relationship between social distance and prejudice is documented in studies of attitudes towards individuals who suffer from a mental illness.<ref name=":8">{{Cite journal|last1=Jorm|first1=Anthony F.|last2=Oh|first2=Elizabeth|date=January 2009|title=Desire for Social Distance from People with Mental Disorders|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/00048670802653349|journal=Australian & New Zealand Journal of Psychiatry|volume=43|issue=3|pages=183–200|doi=10.1080/00048670802653349|pmid=19221907|s2cid=9651718|issn=0004-8674|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Distance from the mentally ill and the desire to maintain it depends on the diagnosis, and varies across age groups and nationalities.<ref name=":8" /> The desire to maintain social distance is reduced with exposure to/familiarity with mental illness,<ref name=":8" /> and increased with perceptions that mentally ill individuals are dangerous.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Angermeyer|first1=M. C.|last2=Matschinger|first2=H.|date=2003-09-02|title=The stigma of mental illness: effects of labelling on public attitudes towards people with mental disorder|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1034/j.1600-0447.2003.00150.x|journal=Acta Psychiatrica Scandinavica|volume=108|issue=4|pages=304–309|doi=10.1034/j.1600-0447.2003.00150.x|pmid=12956832|s2cid=18917348|issn=0001-690X}}</ref><ref name=":8" />

=== Generosity ===
Social distance has been incorporated in economic decision making experiments using the [[ultimatum game]] and the [[dictator game]]. In this line of work, researchers increase social distance by anonymizing economic decisions. This work finds that social distance reduces altruistic behavior.<ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Charness|first1=Gary|last2=Gneezy|first2=Uri|date=October 2008|title=What's in a name? Anonymity and social distance in dictator and ultimatum games|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2008.03.001|journal=Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization|volume=68|issue=1|pages=29–35|doi=10.1016/j.jebo.2008.03.001|issn=0167-2681}}</ref><ref name=":9">{{Cite journal|last1=Rigdon|first1=Mary|last2=Ishii|first2=Keiko|last3=Watabe|first3=Motoki|last4=Kitayama|first4=Shinobu|date=June 2009|title=Minimal social cues in the dictator game|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2009.02.002|journal=Journal of Economic Psychology|volume=30|issue=3|pages=358–367|doi=10.1016/j.joep.2009.02.002|issn=0167-4870}}</ref><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Buchan|first1=Nancy R.|last2=Johnson|first2=Eric J.|last3=Croson|first3=Rachel T.A.|date=July 2006|title=Let's get personal: An international examination of the influence of communication, culture and social distance on other regarding preferences|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jebo.2004.03.017|journal=Journal of Economic Behavior & Organization|volume=60|issue=3|pages=373–398|doi=10.1016/j.jebo.2004.03.017|s2cid=17776294|issn=0167-2681|url-access=subscription}}</ref> A similar line of work aimed to reduce social distance by increasing social cues, or by incorporating minimal forms of interaction. These manipulations showed that decreasing social distance increases generosity.<ref>{{Cite journal|last=Ahmed|first=Ali M.|date=June 2007|title=Group identity, social distance and intergroup bias|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.joep.2007.01.007|journal=Journal of Economic Psychology|volume=28|issue=3|pages=324–337|doi=10.1016/j.joep.2007.01.007|issn=0167-4870|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":9" /><ref>{{Cite journal|last1=Wu|first1=Yin|last2=Leliveld|first2=Marijke C.|last3=Zhou|first3=Xiaolin|date=December 2011|title=Social distance modulates recipient's fairness consideration in the dictator game: An ERP study|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.08.009|journal=Biological Psychology|volume=88|issue=2–3|pages=253–262|doi=10.1016/j.biopsycho.2011.08.009|pmid=21889968|s2cid=36863397|issn=0301-0511|url-access=subscription}}</ref>

=== Power ===
Research on the relationship between power and social distance suggests that powerful individuals have a greater perception of distance from others.<ref name=":43"/><ref name=":10">{{Cite journal|last1=Lammers|first1=Joris|last2=Galinsky|first2=Adam D.|last3=Gordijn|first3=Ernestine H.|last4=Otten|first4=Sabine|date=2011-08-15|title=Power Increases Social Distance|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/1948550611418679|journal=Social Psychological and Personality Science|volume=3|issue=3|pages=282–290|doi=10.1177/1948550611418679|s2cid=143377272|issn=1948-5506|hdl=11370/e2b19157-95c1-460b-a321-2734b593e79b|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":11">{{Citation|last1=Galinsky|first1=Adam D.|title=Power: Past findings, present considerations, and future directions.|date=2015|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1037/14344-016|work=APA handbook of personality and social psychology, Volume 3: Interpersonal relations.|pages=421–460|place=Washington|publisher=American Psychological Association|isbn=978-1-4338-1703-8|access-date=2020-11-30|last2=Rucker|first2=Derek D.|last3=Magee|first3=Joe C.|doi=10.1037/14344-016|url-access=subscription}}</ref> Based on construal level theory, this means that powerful individuals are more likely to engage in high-level construals.<ref name=":43" /><ref name=":11" /> This connection between power, social distance, and construal level has been used to explain other features of cognitions and behaviors related to power, including findings that powerful individuals are less likely to be influenced by others [#45], and more likely to engage in stereotyping.<ref name=":43" /><ref name=":11" /> This work also has important implications given that greater social distance reduces generosity.<ref name=":10" />

=== Media influence ===
Social distance has also been examined in the context of [[third-person effect]]s.<ref name=":12">{{Cite journal|last=Meirick|first=Patrick C.|date=December 2005|title=Rethinking the Target Corollary|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650205281059|journal=Communication Research|volume=32|issue=6|pages=822–843|doi=10.1177/0093650205281059|hdl=11244/24931 |s2cid=28533150|issn=0093-6502|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":13">{{Cite journal|last=Meirick|first=Patrick C.|date=April 2004|title=Topic-Relevant Reference Groups and Dimensions of Distance|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650203261514|journal=Communication Research|volume=31|issue=2|pages=234–255|doi=10.1177/0093650203261514|hdl=11244/24930 |s2cid=42962482|issn=0093-6502|hdl-access=free}}</ref><ref name=":14">{{Cite journal|last1=Jensen|first1=Jakob D.|last2=Hurley|first2=Ryan J.|date=2005-06-01|title=Third-Person Effects and the Environment: Social Distance, Social Desirability, and Presumed Behavior|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02670.x|journal=Journal of Communication|volume=55|issue=2|pages=242–256|doi=10.1111/j.1460-2466.2005.tb02670.x|issn=0021-9916|url-access=subscription}}</ref><ref name=":15">{{Cite journal|last1=David|first1=Prabu|last2=Morrison|first2=Glenda|last3=Johnson|first3=Melissa A.|last4=Ross|first4=Felecia|date=June 2002|title=Body Image, Race, and Fashion Models|url=http://dx.doi.org/10.1177/0093650202029003003|journal=Communication Research|volume=29|issue=3|pages=270–294|doi=10.1177/0093650202029003003|s2cid=45017362|issn=0093-6502|url-access=subscription}}</ref> The third-person effect describes individuals' tendency to assume that media messages have a greater influence on those other than themselves.<ref name=":13" /> Some work has shown that this effect increases the greater the distance from the self; in other words, the greater the social distance between an individual and a hypothetical target, the greater the perceived influence of the media message on the target.<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":13" /><ref name=":14" /><ref name=":15" /> This phenomenon has been dubbed the [[Social Distance Corollary|social distance corollary]].<ref name=":12" /><ref name=":15" />

=== Housing ===
''[[Core-periphery structure|Social periphery]]'' is a term often used in conjunction with social distance. It refers to people being 'distant' with regard to social relations. It is often implied that it is measured from the dominant ''city élite''. The social periphery of a city is often located in the [[city center|centre]].

''Locational periphery'' in contrast is used to describe places physically distant from the heart of the city. These places often include [[suburbia|suburbs]] which are socially close to the core of the city. In some cases the locational periphery overlaps with the social periphery, such as in [[Paris]]' ''[[banlieu]]es''.

In 1991, [[Geoff Mulgan]] stated that "The centres of two cities are often for practical purposes closer to each other than to their own peripheries."<ref>Mulgan G (1991) Communications and Control: Networks and the New Economics of Communication (Polity, Cambridge)</ref> This reference to social distance is especially true for [[global cities]].

==See also==
* [[Bogardus Social Distance Scale]]
* [[Social Distance Corollary]]

==References==
{{Reflist}}

{{Authority control}}

[[Category:Sociological terminology]]
[[Category:Social status|distance]]
[[Category:Prejudice and discrimination]]