Search results

The contrasting interaction potentials of commonly used seating ar rangements for small and large group meetings are discussed from the vantage point of contemporary definitions of privacy, which define pri vacy as the right individuals have to control what information about themselves should or should not be communicated to others and under what circumstances. Privacy is further defined as a functional aspect of the design of physical environments. Research is reviewed to show that seat location is associated with verbal interaction rates and visual acces sibility among and between group members and leaders. Furthermore, it is argued that group members' seating choices may be manifestations of coping behavior and privacy regulation and that it might be appropriate, therefore, to design and test seating layouts that allow individual users self-selected options for involvement or withdrawal. A seating arrange ment that provides these options is suggested along with some pos sibilities for enhancing privacy regulation by individuals. The paper concludes with the suggestion that user-initiated interventions into the design of physical environments can follow awareness of the dynamics of these environments.

The verbal behavior, physical locations, and seat preferences of members of large groups assembled in row-and-column seating arrangements were investigated. In several trials of the experiment subjects had been categorized a priori as "high," "moderate," or "low" in respect to verbalization rates and then were randomly assigned to seats without regard for these rates. Subsequent research procedures revealed that location significantly affected the verbalization rates of the "highs" and the "moderates." Centrally located seats were associated with significantly higher verbalization rates on the part of their occupants than were noncentrally located seats. These findings confirmed the observations of previous investigators that there is an "ecology of participation" in classrooms which may make it possible to predict from which locations most verbalizations would emanate. Through the administration of a projective procedure it was also revealed that "high" verbalizers chose central seats to a greater degree and extent than did "low" verbalizers. The seat preferences of "high" and "moderate" verbalizers also differed significantly; "high" verbalizers preferred central seats to a greater extent than did "moderate" verbalizers. Some aspects of coping theory were offered as a possible explanation of this behavior.