Let me illustrate these concepts with an example from Western culture. Office occupants often have doors that are systematically used to control access by others. When I wish to be alone, close my door and thereby use the physical environment to shut myself off from others. Here the “closed” part of the physical environment circle predominates. When I wish to be accessible, I leave my door ajar, and the “open” part of the circle predominates. But there are people and cultures who do not use such a mechanism, which could mean that their “environmental circle” usually has the open section occupying the largest area. The model offered here states that, although they do not use that particular mechanism, they probably have other mechanisms that operate as part of a total privacy regulation system. The superimposed circle reflects the idea that we are dealing with a complex system of privacy regulation that can include a variety of combinations of mechanisms in the smaller circles and that operates as a holistic entity. In sum, I hypothesize that all cultures have evolved mechanisms by which members can regulate privacy, but that the particular pattern of mechanisms may differ across cultures. Thus, to examine privacy as a cross-cultural phenomenon, the level of analysis must be shifted from particular privacy behaviors to a more holistic, pattern like analysis.