Brief articleNear space and its relation to claustrophobic fear
Introduction
Fear has long been supposed to disrupt cognitive and perceptual processing (Baddeley, 1972, Beck et al., 1985). Only recently, however, have such effects been formally investigated in both clinical and non-clinical settings. There are numerous cases of perceptual distortions accompanying phobias; for example, one man with intense fear of losing control of his car reported that bridges sloped dangerously and extended almost indefinitely (Rachman & Cuk, 1992). Such associations have also been reported in non-phobic individuals; fear, even when depicted in others, modulates even the lowest levels of visual processing (Anderson and Phelps, 2001, Phelps et al., 2006, Vuilleumier and Schwartz, 2001). Other recent studies report systematic links between fear of slopes and perceived inclination of hills (Stefanucci, Proffitt, Clore, & Parekh, 2008), as well as between fear of heights and perceived vertical distance (Jackson, 2009, Stefanucci and Proffitt, 2009, Teachman et al., 2008), with more intense fear predicting greater overestimation of steepness and height. Here we investigate the association between claustrophobic fear in a non-clinical sample and spatial perception as it relates to the near space immediately surrounding the body.
Claustrophobia is a situational phobia featuring intense anxiety in relation to enclosed spaces and physically restrictive situations (American Psychiatric Association, 2000). Claustrophobic individuals typically fear restriction in several spaces, including small rooms, tunnels, elevators, trains, and crowded areas. They may also fear suffocation, typically worrying that there would be insufficient air to support normal breathing if they were somehow confined to the space (Kirkpatrick, 1984). Although only a minority seek medical treatment, as many as 4% of people may experience severe claustrophobia (Curtis, Magee, Eatin, Wittchen, & Kessler, 1998), with many more experiencing at least slight symptoms (Radomsky, Rachman, Thordarson, McIsaac, & Teachman, 2001). Given recent findings showing an association between acrophobic symptoms (i.e., fear of heights) and perceived vertical height (e.g., Teachman et al., 2008), we investigated whether claustrophobic fear similarly relates to the representation of near space.
It is well established that near (or peripersonal) space is represented differently than more distant (or extrapersonal) space. Neurophysiological studies in monkeys have identified neurons in frontal and parietal cortical regions specifically responsive to vision of objects close to or approaching the body (Graziano et al., 1994, Rizzolatti et al., 1981). Studies of neurological patients following brain injury to parieto–frontal regions have demonstrated double dissociations of attentional deficits such as hemi-spatial neglect for near and far space (Cowey et al., 1994, Halligan and Marshall, 1991; see also di Pellegrino, Làdavas, & Farnè, 1997). In healthy adults, lateral attentional biases also vary as a function of distance. When bisecting horizontally-oriented lines (i.e., indicating the perceived midpoint) presented visually, participants generally show a small left bias in near space, known as pseudoneglect (for review, see Jewell & McCourt, 2000). At farther distances, however, bias shifts rightward (Longo and Lourenco, 2006, Lourenco and Longo, 2009, Varnava et al., 2002). This shift in bias is generally continuous, and the rate at which it occurs can be taken as an index of the extent, or “size”, of near space. Indeed, there are consistent individual differences and high test–retest reliability (r > .8) in the rate of this rightward shift (Longo & Lourenco, 2007). This spatial gradient of lateral attentional bias is also systematically related to arm length; shorter-armed participants show relatively abrupt shifts from left to right bias, indicating smaller near spaces, whereas those with longer arms show more gradual rightward shifts, indicating larger near spaces (Longo & Lourenco, 2007).
Following our previous studies, adult participants bisected horizontal lines with a laser pointer at multiple distances. For each participant, the size of near space was quantified by calculating the slope of the best-fitting line regressing rightward bias on distance. As noted above, these slopes are inversely related to the size of near space, with steeper slopes (i.e., more abrupt shifts in bias) corresponding to smaller near spaces and more gradual slopes to larger near spaces. We also assessed trait-level claustrophobic fear using the claustrophobia questionnaire (CLQ; Rachman and Taylor, 1993, Radomsky et al., 2001), a self-report measure which has been used for both clinical and research purposes (McIsaac et al., 1998, Powers et al., 2004).
Although the function of near space is most commonly regarded as controlling visuomotor action (e.g., Farnè et al., 2005, Làdavas and Serino, 2008, Maravita and Iriki, 2004), some investigators have suggested that near space may also function as a protective buffer, maintaining a margin of safety around the body surface and coordinating defensive behaviors against potentially noxious or threatening stimuli (Graziano & Cooke, 2006; see also Hall, 1966, Sommer, 1959). On this latter interpretation, the presence of objects in near space might produce anxiety and perhaps even lead to subsequent fear of encroaching features in the environment. Individuals with relatively large near spaces might thus be more prone to experience symptoms of claustrophobia than individuals with smaller near spaces. If claustrophobic fear is related to the representation of near space, then CLQ scores should be systematically related to regression slopes of bias from the line bisection task, with greater claustrophobic fear predicting larger near spaces (indicated by more gradual rightward shifts in bias over increasing distance).
Section snippets
Participants
Thirty-five students (21 females) between 18 and 33 years of age (M = 21.2) participated for course credit or payment. Most participants (30) were right-handed (M = 67, range: −54.6 to 100; Oldfield, 1971). All had normal or corrected-to-normal vision. Procedures were approved by the local ethics committee.
Materials and procedure
Participants were tested in a large square room (wall length: 3.8 m; height: 2.9 m) where they bisected lines of 10, 20, and 30 cm (height: 1 mm) using a laser pointer at nine distances (30–270 cm, at
Results
Bisection responses were measured off-line by two coders who never disagreed by more than 0.25 mm. We estimated the size of near space using least-squares linear regression to determine the rate at which bias shifted rightward with increasing distance, as in previous studies. For each participant, we regressed rightward bias (% of line length) on distance to compute the slope of the best-fitting line. Fig. 1 shows a clear rightward shift in bias over distance, mean β = 0.55% line length/m, t(34) =
Discussion
Individual differences in the size of near space, measured using a visual line bisection task, were systematically related to individual differences in trait claustrophobic fear in a non-clinical sample. Independent of arm length, participants with greater claustrophobic fear showed more gradual rightward shifts in attentional bias over distance (i.e., larger near spaces) than those with less claustrophobic fear. This suggests that people with greater anxiety of enclosed spaces and physically
Acknowledgments
The authors would like to thank Dede Addy, Esther Chang, Edmund Fernandez, Munir Meghjani, Allison Palmisano, Paul Pfeilschiefter, Sharmin Shariff, and Kirsten Skillrud for help with testing participants and coding data.
References (44)
- et al.
Left visuo-spatial neglect can be worse in far than in near space
Neuropsychologia
(1994) - et al.
Processing of peripersonal and extrapersonal space using tools: Evidence from visual line bisection in real and virtual environments
Neuropsychologia
(2008) - et al.
Parieto–frontal interactions, personal space, and defensive behavior
Neuropsychologia
(2006) - et al.
Extending or projecting peripersonal space with tools? Multisensory interactions highlight only the distal and proximal ends of tools
Neuroscience Letters
(2004) - et al.
Pseudoneglect: A review and metaanalysis of performance factors in line bisection tasks
Neuropsychologia
(2000) - et al.
On the nature of near space: Effects of tool use and the transition to far space
Neuropsychologia
(2006) - et al.
The plasticity of near space: Evidence for contraction
Cognition
(2009) - et al.
Tools for the body (schema)
Trends in Cognitive Sciences
(2004) The assessment and analysis of handedness: The Edinburgh inventory
Neuropsychologia
(1971)- et al.
Fearful distortions
Behavior Research and Therapy
(1992)
The claustrophobia questionnaire
Journal of Anxiety Disorders
Afferent properties of periarcuate neurons in macaque monkeys. II. Visual responses
Behavioral Brain Research
Line bisection in normal adults: Direction of attentional bias for near and far space
Neuropsychologia
Lesions of the human amygdala impair enhanced perception of emotionally salient events
Nature
Selective attention and performance in dangerous environments
British Journal of Psychology
Anxiety disorders and phobias: A cognitive perspective
When far becomes near: Remapping of space by tool use
Journal of Cognitive Neuroscience
Visual disorientation with special reference to lesions of the right cerebral hemisphere
Brain
Specific fears and phobias. Epidemiology and classification
British Journal of Psychiatry
Seeing where your hands are
Nature
Shaping multisensory action-space with tools: Evidence from patients with cross-modal extinction
Neuropsychologia
Cited by (107)
Evolutionary perspective on peripersonal space and perception
2023, Cognitive Archaeology, Body Cognition, and the Evolution of Visuospatial PerceptionFlood disaster evacuation route choice in Indonesian urban riverbank kampong: Exploring the role of individual characteristics, path risk elements, and path network configuration
2022, International Journal of Disaster Risk ReductionAcute stress affects peripersonal space representation in cortisol stress responders
2022, PsychoneuroendocrinologyCitation Excerpt :PPS contracts when facing a stranger (Teneggi et al., 2013) or a person who is perceived as immoral (Iachini et al., 2015; Pellencin et al., 2018), and it extends towards people that participants are willing to interact with (Pellencin et al., 2018; Teneggi et al., 2013). Personality traits, such as anxiety (Sambo and Iannetti, 2013), and phobias (Taffou and Viaud-Delmon, 2014; Cartaud et al., 2018; Lourenco, Longo and Pathman, 2011) also contribute to defining the extent of PPS. Stress defines a cluster of psycho-physiological responses aimed at activating resources to face challenging situations and restoring and maintaining the organism’s homeostasis (Karatsoreos and McEwen, 2011; McEwen, 2013).
A review of the effects of architectural stimuli on human psychology and physiology
2022, Building and EnvironmentThe emotional influence of different geometries in virtual spaces: A neurocognitive examination
2022, Journal of Environmental Psychology