Sex Differences in Posture-Related Human Behavior in Subways - Research Paper Example

of the Introduction Peoples who flock in the subway to avail transportation have their respective or distinct behaviours. Depending on the character, psyche and emotional feeling of these transient beings, their behaviours are depicted on how they walk through, avail of seats, and behave while seated with the rest of the passengers. These passengers could be professionals, workers, students, sports enthusiast, and mere travellers, in a rush or simply on time for the ride. Their actions and how they positioned themselves are often subject of varied interpretation of psychologists or sociologists who are in observational research of their behaviours. Methodology This is a mixed qualitative and quantitative study relating to men and women passengers posture in a subway which aimed at explicating the implication of their respective postures when on board a train or when on a subway. The qualitative aspect aimed at elucidating the subject using literatures and references sourced from journals, books and magazines. The quantitative aspect of the study will be derived from the number of subjects chosen by researchers as observatory objects of the study. This mixed research aimed at generating deeper insight of the passengers postures regardless of their characters and professional affiliation in life. It will attempt to understand whether men or women adopt a wide or closed position while in a public transport. Participants Races are not considered here but the ages of the subjects to be observed are those within 18 to 30 years old. The researcher had 848 passengers of which 412 are women and another 436 are men for observation and for analysis. The percentile distributions of observed subjects are 48.6% women and 51.4% are men. On age distribution,, there were 471 (55.5%) subjects aging 18 to 35 years old and 377 (44.5%) that are aging 35 above. Point sampling was utilized in the observation where subjects are observed for few seconds, if they are affiliated to a particular age bracket and social group, and using hypotheses as guidepost in the observation (Vrugt and Luyerink, 2000). The data and information are collected at day time and off-peak hours at the subway. The subjects are also chosen randomly by the researchers. Literatures This researcher argues that passengers, no matter how they vary in character, are still subject to the rules and regulations imposed by the subway management (MTA.info, 2013). For instance, the NYC Transit Rules of Conduct demand that passengers should enter the in the system properly and try ensure that the MetroCard works properly (MTA.info, 2013). They should not refuse to present special fare card to security officers and to transit employee (MTA.info, 2013). They are also disallowed to straddle a bicycle, roller skates, or make use of skateboard or a scooter. The reasons are obviously for their safety (MTA.info, 2013). They are also disallowed to move betwixt end doors or subway especially when the train is in motion unless authorities directed them to move under legitimate reasons (MTA.info, 2013). Passengers are also disallowed to place their foot or feet in the subway, bus or platform bench and should only occupy one seat (MTA.info, 2013). Passengers are likewise forbidden to place bags on empty seats to avoid interferences or cause discomfort with other passengers on board (MTA.info, 2013). Moreover, passengers should not panhandle or beg, block the alley for movement, lie down or drink alcohol, or engage in commercial activities, and carry bulky items that can cause hazards and damage the property (MTA.info, 2013). Above all these, passengers are not allowed to carry bladed weapons or firearms or any dangerous instruments (MTA.info, 2013). Among the security prohibition is the carrying of explosives or combustible or radioactive materials, unless carried by competent authorities and with due information accorded to the subway management (MTA.info, 2013). Like any private properties, passengers are disallowed to write graffiti on the transport walls and the like. Smoking while on board is also prohibited (MTA.info, 2013). The policy further imposed fines or penalty for any commission of violation thereof (MTA.info, 2013). The subway management likewise impose restriction on some certain areas and some activities that can cause harm to passengers’ physical parts (MTA.info, 2013). Other behavioural restriction while on board the train include display of annoyance (MTA.info, 2013). Those who are carrying animals and pets are also subject to policies to ensure that these can’t harm other passengers or cause commotion inside (MTA.info, 2013). Those who violate either of the restrictions will be subject of criminal and civil prosecution with corresponding penalties of fines or imprisonment (MTA.info, 2013). These policies are set under 1203-a(3) and 1204(5-a) of the Public Authorities Law for the New York City Transit Authority and Manhattan and Bronx Surface Transit Operating Authority to encourage or promote safety, enforce the proper use of transit facilities of the authorities, protect passengers and transit facilities and to ensure that payment of fares and other lawful charges for the use of their systems are dutifully exacted from passengers or clients (MTA.info, 2013, p. 1). Doll (2011) also prescribed a comprehensive guide, in accordance to the policy, onhow to behave properly while on the subway. Respects to co-passengers are paramount thus passengers ought to be self-regulating their selves especially those with long hairs so as not to piss off others (Doll, 2011). The subway is a public transport and trains are destined to its endpoint, hence, passengers should regulate their voices and when eating to ensure that public hygiene are preserved (Doll, 2011). The site is not for yoga, not for singing, banging, muttering, or a place where one should be naked or be scary to others (Doll, 2011). Public decency is a must for public convenience (Doll, 2011). Notwithstanding this rules, gender-based studies posit that passengers have varying postures when on a subway. A research argued that women will often adopt a more closed sitting position opposite to that of men position. Their feminine and masculine attributes and character are presumed to be contributory in ascribing gender-based analysis on their respective positions and posture while on transit or while in a subway. Vrugt and Luyerink (2000) argued that the posture of passengers describe the stereotypical posture of men and women. Vrught et al (2000) argued that men usually are in a wide sitting position while women are in a closed-leg posture. These positions are ascribed as either masculine or feminine respectively. This is perceived as consistent in a replicated study conducted. Such posture are consistent even as these passengers read newspapers, or they are obese, or are carrying handbags/things posted on their laps ot are seated opposite to each other. Such study was undertaken with defined observation scheme that combined all possible arm position of the passengers: narrow, wide or medium (Vrught et al., 2000). Findings The result of the study is depicted the following result: Case Processing Summary   Cases Valid Missing Total N Percent N Percent N Percent Holding position * Participant gender 848 100.0% 0 0.0% 848 100.0% Data showed that 100% of the subject were observed that are in a holding position and that therefore their hands and arms are positioned either below or above their shoulders. Data further revealed that 288 women or 52.7% women are in holding position and there are 258 males or 280.7 or 47.3% males are holding below and thus, their arms and hands are positioned below their shoulders. Gender-based segregation of the data showed that 69.9 % of women are demonstrating such position while there are 47.3% are males. Data also showed that there are 146.7 or 41.1% females are in a holding position and 155.3 males (or 58.9%) are males with above holding position. Data are bared in the table below: Holding position * Participant gender Crosstabulation   Participant gender Total Female Male Holding position below Count 288 258 546 Expected Count 265.3 280.7 546.0 % within Holding position 52.7% 47.3% 100.0% % within Participant gender 69.9% 59.2% 64.4% % of Total 34.0% 30.4% 64.4% Std. Residual 1.4 -1.4   above Count 124 178 302 Expected Count 146.7 155.3 302.0 % within Holding position 41.1% 58.9% 100.0% % within Participant gender 30.1% 40.8% 35.6% % of Total 14.6% 21.0% 35.6% Std. Residual -1.9 1.8   Total Count 412 436 848 Expected Count 412.0 436.0 848.0 % within Holding position 48.6% 51.4% 100.0% % within Participant gender 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% % of Total 48.6% 51.4% 100.0% Chi-Square Tests   Value df Asymp. Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (2-sided) Exact Sig. (1-sided) Pearson Chi-Square 10.633a 1 .001     Continuity Correctionb 10.171 1 .001     Likelihood Ratio 10.678 1 .001     Fisher's Exact Test       .001 .001 Linear-by-Linear Association 10.621 1 .001     N of Valid Cases 848         a. 0 cells (0.0%) have expected count less than 5. The minimum expected count is 146.73. b. Computed only for a 2x2 table A Pearson chi-square test of independence was done to look into the relation between gender and their hand positions situated either below or above their shoulder level. The situation, based on figures showed that the variables were significant, as demonstrated by the figures in the above table. In a graphic scale, more females exhibited below holding position posture than males and more males are demonstrating above holding position than females based on the observation and statistical analysis. Conclusion This researcher affirmed the findings of earlier research conducted that body postures in the subways are reflective of the gender disposition of a passenger and such ascribed role being female or male have implications too of their body orientation and perception. Whether gravity is relevant here or not but for certain, the postures are also motivated by other factors such as the need to maintain stability while the train are in a transit mode (Lopez, Bachofner, Mercier, & Blanke, 2009; Dichgans, Held, Young, & Brandt, 1972). It is human inclination to maintain balance while the train is accelerated to a speed to reach its final point of destination although gender ascription influence to the nature of the posture comfortably adhered by male and female passengers. Other researchers posit that spatial preferences may also influence the body posture of a passenger but this research simply affirmed that more feminine passengers prefer below holding position than the masculine and that more masculine prefers below holding position. This is best demonstrated in the statistical analysis and in the graph shown. Statistical information may have shown the differences of the preferences of the passengers of their position but it does not reflect gender bias or prejudice of their postures. The ascription is simply sociologically impressed on them as women and men or as masculine or feminine. There is more truth that such posture is motivated by the need to attain gravitational balance and to maintain composure or comfortability as train accelerated its speed toward its destination. The finding may have consistency to earlier research conducted by experts but aside from mentioned reasons, which include gender and balance, it’s also possible that subway rules motivate them to temper or put restraint their physical behaviours (Westerterp, 2008) while on board. References Dichgans, J., Held, R., Young, L. R., & Brandt, T. (1972). Moving visual scenes in?uence the apparent direction of gravity. Science, vol. 178, pp. 1217–1219. Doll, J. (2011). How to Behave on the Subway: A Comprehensive Guide, US: The Village Voice, p. 1. Lopez, C., Bachofner, C., Mercier, M., & Blanke, O. (2009). Gravity and observer’s body orientation in?uence the visual perception of human body postures. Journal of Vision, vol. 9(5):1, pp. 1–14. MTA.info (2013). Transit Adjudication Bureau, New York, New York. p. 1 Retrieved: http://www.mta.info/nyct/rules/rules.htm Accessed: October 2, 2013. Vrugt, A. & Luyerink, M. (2000). The Contribution of Bodily Posture to Gender Stereotypical Impression, Social Behaviour and Personality, vol 28 (1), pp. 91-104. Westerterp, K. R. (2008). Physical activity as determinant of daily energy expenditure, Physiology and Behavior, vol. 93, pp. 1039-1043. Read More