Violating Social Norms

Between the hours of 11 a.m. and 1 p.m. each day, Baker University Center's (Ohio University) food court becomes swarmed with students looking to grab a lunch on the go in between classes. It is not uncommon during this time period to see several people, food trays in hand, circling the cafeteria in search of an open table. Plenty of seating is available to accommodate even the largest crowds; however, the disposition of most students during this time hinders that availability. A large percentage of students at the food court tend to be dining alone, meaning a table that could comfortably seat six often is "occupied" by a single person. Despite an atmosphere reminiscent of a dining hall or mall food court, there exists an unspoken taboo in the University Center that discourages students from sitting down at a table which is already occupied, even if by a single person. I decided to test and observe the overall reaction to one's breaking this norm.

For this experiment, I decided to simply approach a person sitting alone with a tray of food, a copy of the local newspaper or a book. I would gesture to a seat diagonal from the selected person, and politely ask permission to sit. The choice of seating at the table was intended to send the message that I was not seeking this person out for any reason besides the lack of available seating. Over the course of four days, I repeated this experiment a total of 16 times. In only one instance did a subject balk at my request, explaining that she was waiting to meet a group of friends.

During the first two days, in which I was granted permission by seven of the eight subjects, I always carried a lunch tray with some sort of food on it. I would sit down, introduce myself and attempt to strike up a conversation. What I found was that regardless of how polite they were in granting me permission to sit, subjects were far less willing to converse. Most responses to my simple questions (i.e., inquiring about the subject's major, year, and living situation) were met with one- or two-word answers. Although the answers were not presented in a rude or hostile manner, it became clear that subjects had been drawn outside of their social comfort boundaries. They appeared anxious to finish their meals and "escape" the situation.

For the last two days, in which I was granted permission by all eight subjects, I would simply carry a book or newspaper to the table. Once again, I would thank the subject and introduce myself. I did not, however, make any sort of attempt at conversation. Instead I tried to appear immersed in whatever reading material I had brought with me. Not surprisingly, none of the subjects made any attempt at conversation. They appeared just as uncomfortable, if not more, than the previous subjects. Once again, they hurriedly finished their food and left the table as soon as possible.

During the course of the experiment, I often found myself anxious when approaching a table. I became immediately self-conscious of how I was being perceived by the subject - and I always carried a fear of the embarrassment of rejection. I became especially anxious when approaching tables with a female subject, because of the assumptions they were likely to carry about my ulterior motives. I found the first handful of experiments incredibly awkward, especially since I had originally expected subjects to at least engage in some type of superficial conversation. As the days progressed, however, I began to find myself at ease.

The complicated issues behind this norm are a bit tough to unravel. The overwhelming majority of subjects who granted me permission seem to indicate that most realize the norm is an impractical one, especially during hours of heavy traffic. However, their hurriedness to escape the situation and reluctance to engage in conversation reveal another side of the coin. Students, it appears, are not particularly willing to give up their solidarity at this particular food court in the interest of practicality.