Reactions to Strangers at a Shopping Mall:
The Effects of Verbal Stimulation on Response to Strangers

Regina D. Burk
Missouri Western State College
December 5, 1995

Abstract

Reactions of shoppers at a mall were observed when exposed to eye-contact from a stranger. Subjects were exposed to one of two conditions. In the first condition, the "stranger" only attempted to initiate eye-contact and nothing further was done. In the second condition, once eye-contact was initiated, a verbal cue of "hello" was given. It was hypothesized that there would be a difference in reactions from subjects between the two conditions as well as a difference between the reactions of men and women to the eye-contact. Results show no significant differences occurred on either account.

Introduction

Within the last twenty years, there has been a lot of interest in studying the behavior of individuals when encountering a person that the individual does not already know. Researchers have been particularly interested in the establishment and maintenance of eye-contact between two people as well as the reaction of the subject to the established eye-contact. It has been suggested that, in this culture, a direct gaze can convey openness and may elicit feelings of intimacy and trust (Ellsworth & Langer, 1976). Since eye-contact is usually the first form of communication, this may explain why first impressions are lasting impressions.

Many factors have been shown to have an effect on the rate of eye-contact and response. In one study, two female and two male experimenters attempted to make eye-contact with commuters as they approached an express train linking a suburb and city, and as commuters left the same train. The results of this study, which only measured the amount of eye-contact made, were in support of the hypothesis that people try to reduce stimuli, thus reducing interpersonal overload (McCauley, Coleman, & de-Fusco, 1978). Verbal response to a stranger has been shown to happen only if eye-contact was established, and is rare in city and suburb, but more common in small towns (Newman & McCauley 1977). Another study even reported that when confronted with an unfamiliar person, a subject labeled as having an external locus of control talked more than those labeled as having an internal locus of control (Rajecki, Ickes, & Tanford, 1981) indicating that personality interacts with response to strangers.

Many studies have been conducted measuring eye-contact when paired with a greeting of some sort. For example, the study by Amato and McInnes (1983) in which pedestrians were given one of several friendly greetings from an investigator in different settings revealed a linear relationship between pleasantness and affiliative behavior. However, these do not show the significance of adding the greeting. I would like to study this significance by comparing the responses of subjects who are given a verbal greeting after having established eye-contact with the responses of those that are given no verbal greeting after eye-contact is established. I propose that subjects who are verbally greeted will acknowledge the encounter more favorably (a wave, nod, or verbal response) and will maintain eye-contact longer than those that are given no verbal stimulus. It was hypothesized that there would be differences in reaction due to sex.


Methods

Subjects

A total of 100 subjects unknowingly participated in one a two conditions. The subjects were taken from a sample of people walking through a shopping mall located in a medium-sized, mid-western town during the time of year known as the Christmas season. Of these subjects, 53 were female and 47 were male. Potential subjects were chosen according to established criteria including the following: potential subjects a) must appear to be over the age of 16, b) must be alone, and c) must not appear to be overly distracted.

Materials

Two female investigators, dressed in moderately neutral clothing so as not to seem out of place, were used in the same setting, each in both the conditions. A subject data sheet was made up, complete with a rating scale of responses, which was established to keep to observations consistent from subject to subject. The response scale rated the subjects responses from 0 to 7 with 0 as no response due to no initial eye-contact, 1-a negative verbal response, 2-a negative facial expression, 3-avoidance of path, 4-ignoring the initiated eye-contact (neutral response), 5-nodding or waving politely, 6-positive facial expression (i.e. smiling), and 7-positive verbal response. A rating of 7 was considered the most positive while a rating of 0 was considered most negative.

Procedure

Observations occurred during the Christmas shopping season at a mall. One investigator stood outside of a shop within the mall and appeared as if she were waiting on someone. The second investigator waited inside the shop for the other to give the details of each subject's reaction. The two researchers traded off in their roles, each encountering 50 subjects total. As a suitable subject approached within what was perceive to be about 10 feet of the "waiting" investigator, she attempted to initiate eye-contact in each of two conditions. In the first condition, the researcher attempted only to initiate eye-contact with the subjects. If eye-contact was established, the researcher attempted to maintain it until the subject passed by or responded. No verbal stimulus was given to subjects under this condition. Subjects of the second condition were exposed to the same variables of eye-contact, but were also given a verbal stimulus in the form of "hello" if eye-contact was established. After each observation, the "waiting" researcher conferred with the second inside the shop who then recorded the details of the interaction.

Care was taken so that the behaviors of the two investigators toward the subjects were approximately equivalent. Measures were also taken so that the encounter did not look conspicuous. There an elapse of time was allowed between each condition to keep from using the same subjects twice.


Results

It was determined that the sex distribution was approximately equal across both conditions. The results were assessed using two two-way analysis of variance (ANOVA) test on the dependent variables of response and establishment of eye-contact using the sex of the subject and the presence of a verbal cue (group condition) as independent variables. The main effects for the group condition were not significant for response variable [F (1, 96)= .664, p>.05] or for whether or not eye-contact was established [F (1, 96)= .404, p>.05]. The main effects for the sex of the subject were also not significant for response variable [F (1, 96)= 1.630, p>.05] or for whether or not eye-contact was established [F (1, 96)= 2.157, p>.05]. There interactions between group condition and sex were not significant for response variable [F (1, 96)= .595, p>.05] or for establishment of eye-contact [F (1, 96)= 1.46, p>.05]. From these results it can be determined that the responses of the participants did not depend upon the sex of the participants or whether or not a verbal cue is paired with eye-contact. Thus, it can be said that there is no difference in how men and women respond to eye-contact initiated by a stranger, at least in this setting.

Discussion

The results of this study show a difference to those of previous studies. It shows no significant difference between the reactions of men and women. It shows that it does not matter whether a verbal cue is given when eye-contact is established. Basically, in a mall setting people may not react as they would in other one-to-one settings.

It must be noted, however, that this study has many flaws. This study was conducted during the busiest time of year for businesses in malls, therefore people may have been more distracted than they would have been during other seasons. People often go shopping in groups or pairs to make shopping more of a social event. This could have caused a problem in the study since only those who were found shopping alone were deemed as subjects. These people could more likely have been less social, because those people who are shopping alone are more likely to be in more of a hurry than those who shop in pairs. One more thing that may have been flawed was in the rating system. Results may have been different if only those who had made eye contact were included, but since those that did not make eye-contact (rated as a zero) were also included, the results of the responses tended to be more negative. Future studies could take this into account and build a better system in which to rate the response.


References

Amato, P. R. & McInnes, I. R. (1983). Affiliative behavior in diverse environments: A consideration of pleasantness, information rate, and the arousal-eliciting quality of settings. Basic and Applied Social Psychology, 4, 109-122.
McCauley, C., Coleman, G., & de-Fusco, P. (1978). Commuter's eye contact with strangers in city and suburban train stations: Evidence of short-term adaptation to interpersonal overload in the city. Environmental Psychology and Nonverbal Behavior, 2, 215-225.
Newman, J. & McCauley, C. (1977). Eye contact with strangers in city, suburb, and small town. Environment and Behavior, 9, 547-558.
Rajecki, D. W., Ickes, W., & Tanford, S. (1981). Locus of control and reactions to strangers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 7, 282-289.

Back to MWSU Psychology Research Page
Back to PSY302 Research Page