Talk:Self-disclosure

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): YherChu.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment
This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): StacyC37.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 08:54, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Untitled
is this supposed to have references?

There are a number of reasons for it to have references. One of them is the existence of them. Should anybody find the concept in treaties or published scientific articles, don't hesitate to list them and the conclusions drawn from them. Secondly, as any concept it has a unique way of being described. The best descriptions are usually made by the ones that discovered/coined the term (or concept). Thirdly, let's not forget that Wikipedia is an encyclopedia and that it should keep its strong-reference quality intact for as many of its articles as possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Matei Fratila (talk • contribs) 12:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

References to consider for PSY406 Editors
Reciprocity


 * Sprecher, S., Treger, S., Wondra, J. D., Hilaire, N., & Wallpe, K. (2013). Taking turns: Reciprocal self-disclosure promotes liking in initial interactions. Journal Of Experimental Social Psychology, doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2013.03.017


 * Rotenberg, K. J., & Chase, N. (1992). Development of the reciprocity of self-disclosure. The Journal Of Genetic Psychology: Research And Theory On Human Development, 153(1), 75-86.


 * Laurenceau, J., Barrett, L., & Pietromonaco, P. R. (1998). Intimacy as an interpersonal process: The importance of self-disclosure, partner disclosure, and perceived partner responsiveness in interpersonal exchanges. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 74(5), 1238-1251. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.74.5.1238

Social-media support


 * Lee, K., Noh, M., & Koo, D. (2013). Lonely people are no longer lonely on social networking sites: The mediating role of self-disclosure and social support. Cyberpsychology, Behavior, And Social Networking, 16(6), 413-418. doi:10.1089/cyber.2012.0553


 * Punyanunt-Carter, N. (2006). An analysis of college students' self-disclosure behaviors on the Internet. College Student Journal, 40(2), 329-331


 * Bobkowski, P. S., & Pearce, L. D. (2011). Baring their souls in online profiles or not? Religious self‐disclosure in social media. Journal For The Scientific Study Of Religion, 50(4), 744-762. doi:10.1111/j.1468-5906.2011.01597.x


 * Jiang, L., Bazarova, N. N., & Hancock, J. T. (2013). From perception to behavior: Disclosure reciprocity and the intensification of intimacy in computer-mediated communication. Communication Research, 40(1), 125-143. doi:10.1177/0093650211405313


 * Davis, K. (2012). Friendship 2.0: Adolescents' experiences of belonging and self-disclosure online. Journal Of Adolescence, 35(6), 1527-1536. doi:10.1016/j.adolescence.2012.02.013


 * Blau, I. (2011). Application use, online relationship types, self-disclosure, and Internet abuse among children and youth: Implications for education and Internet safety programs. Journal Of Educational Computing Research, 45(1), 95-116. doi:10.2190/EC.45.1.e

Intimate relationships


 * Ignatius, E., & Kokkonen, M. (2007). Factors contributing to verbal self- disclosure. Nordic Psychology, 59(4), 362-391. doi:10.1027/1901-2276.59.4.362


 * Laurenceau, J., Barrett, L., & Rovine, M. J. (2005). The Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy in Marriage: A Daily-Diary and Multilevel Modeling Approach. Journal Of Family Psychology, 19(2), 314-323. doi:10.1037/0893-3200.19.2.314


 * Tolstedt, B. E., & Stokes, J. P. (1984). Self-disclosure, intimacy, and the depenetration process. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 46(1), 84-90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.1.84


 * Hendrick, S. S. (1981). Self-disclosure and marital satisfaction. Journal Of Personality And Social Psychology, 40(6), 1150-1159. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.40.6.1150


 * Sprecher, S., & Hendrick, S. S. (2004). Self-Disclosure in Intimate Relationships: Associations With Individual and Relationship Characteristics Over Time. Journal Of Social And Clinical Psychology, 23(6), 857-877. doi:10.1521/jscp.23.6.857.54803


 * Rehman, U. S., Rellini, A. H., & Fallis, E. (2011). The importance of sexual self‐disclosure to sexual satisfaction and functioning in committed relationships. Journal Of Sexual Medicine, 8(11), 3108-3115. doi:10.1111/j.1743-6109.2011.02439.x

In therapy


 * Ziv-Beiman, S. (2013). Therapist self-disclosure as an integrative intervention. Journal Of Psychotherapy Integration, 23(1), 59-74. doi:10.1037/a0031783


 * Moore, J., & Jenkins, P. (2012). 'Coming out' in therapy? Perceived risks and benefits of self-disclosure of sexual orientation by gay and lesbian therapists to straight clients. Counselling & Psychotherapy Research, 12(4), 308-315. doi:10.1080/14733145.2012.660973


 * Kronner, H. W. (2013). Use of self-disclosure for the gay male therapist: The impact on gay males in therapy. Journal Of Social Service Research, 39(1), 78-94. doi:10.1080/01488376.2012.686732


 * Sturges, J. W. (2012). Use of therapist self-disclosure and self-involving statements. The Behavior Therapist, 35(5), 90-93.


 * Gibson, M. F. (2012). Opening up: Therapist self-disclosure in theory, research, and practice. Clinical Social Work Journal, 40(3), 287-296. doi:10.1007/s10615-012-0391-4

In childhood


 * Urry, S. A., Nelson, L. J., & Padilla-Walker, L. M. (2011). Mother knows best: Psychological control, child disclosure, and maternal knowledge in emerging adulthood. Journal Of Family Studies, 17(2), 157-173. doi:10.5172/jfs.2011.17.2.157


 * Lwin, M. O., Miyazaki, A. D., Stanaland, A. S., & Lee, E. (2012). Online usage motive and information disclosure for preteen children. Young Consumers, 13(4), 345-356. doi:10.1108/17473611211282590


 * Tokić, A., & Pećnik, N. (2011). Parental behaviors related to adolescents’ self-disclosure: Adolescents’ views. Journal Of Social And Personal Relationships, 28(2), 201-222. doi:10.1177/0265407510382320


 * Cheung, C. S., Pomerantz, E. M., & Dong, W. (2013). Does adolescents' disclosure to their parents matter for their academic adjustment?. Child Development, 84(2), 693-710. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8624.2012.01853.x


 * Hunter, S. B., Barber, B. K., Olsen, J. A., McNeely, C. A., & Bose, K. (2011). Adolescents’ self-disclosure to parents across cultures: Who discloses and why. Journal Of Adolescent Research, 26(4), 447-478. doi:10.1177/0743558411402334

Feedback on references
I like the fact that you already have a basic organization here for subheadings. This will be very useful in crafting your article. However, you should make sure that you have an overview section where you cite research that defines self-disclosure. You also need to make sure that you do retain the description of social penetration theory and perhaps expand upon it. Also, you want to be careful about how you categorize research in your writing. For example, one of your childhood references is about online self disclosure. I would be inclined to move it to the online section, but I'd have to see section drafts before committing to that suggestion. This is something you should bear in mind as you construct and edit your article.Gseidman (talk) 22:20, 6 October 2013 (UTC)

Revision of self-disclosure
The students editing this article for the Psy406 class at Albright College are looking at the following topics to expand upon:

Overview and definition of Self-Disclosure

Social Media People online view disclosures as more intimate and are then more likely to disclose themselves. They are also more likely to disclose online than they are in a face to face conversation. In one study, about half of teens reported that disclosing personal information was easier online than in face to face interaction. The reason it is reported as easier is because there is a perception of reduced nonverbal cues and a feeling of control in these conversations. Girls in this study were also more likely to engage in intimate self-disclosure while boys have instrumental online communications. Men usually base friendship on a shared activity, so their conversations include less intimate details like school or making plans with another friend.

Overview There are two dimensions to self-disclosure: breadth and depth. Both are crucial in developing a fully intimate relationship. The range of topics discussed by two individuals is the breadth of disclosure. The degree to which the information revealed is private or personal is the depth of that disclosure. It is easier for breadth to be expanded first in a relationship because of its more accessible features; it is our outer layers of personality and everyday lives, such as occupations and preferences. Depth is more difficult to reach given its inner location; it includes painful memories and more unusual traits that we might try to hide from most people. This is why reveal ourselves most and discuss the widest range of topics with our spouses and love relationships with the opposite sex. EHerman2015 (talk) 02:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Reciprocity/Intimate Relationships Self-disclosure usually influences whether two people will want to interact again. Research has shown that when one person self-discloses, another person is more likely to self-disclose. This is called reciprocity. There are two types of reciprocity, turn-taking reciprocity and extended reciprocity. Turn-taking is when partners immediately self-disclose with one another and extended is when disclosure happens over a period of time. Reciprocity can be explained by the social exchange theory, which explains that people attempt to maintain equality in self-disclosure because an imbalance in this makes them uncomfortable. Research has also shown that people who self-disclose are more likely to report liking the other person, feeling close and similar to them and enjoying their company. Reciprocity can also increase feelings of intimacy if the person disclosing feels understood and valued by their partner. Research also shows that emotional disclosures increase intimacy more than factual disclosures. The transition from sharing impersonal to personal facts is crucial to the building of an intimate relationship. One must feel accepted in order to feel comfortable enough to self-disclose. Without acceptance, one partner will withdraw and fail to reveal personal facts within the relationship. Sharing our selves also brings us out of our imaginary worlds and allows us to see the realities of the world we live in. We are most comfortable sharing with those whom we like and feel like us. There is also evidence that someone who introduces himself with more intimacy is more likely to facilitate self-disclosure and intimacy with the recipient. Thus, self-disclosure breeds intimacy. This is why reveal ourselves most and discuss the widest range of topics with our spouses and love relationships with the opposite sex. EHerman2015 (talk) 02:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

Further, people first disclose facts, then emotions and disclose mostly positive information in early stages of a relationship.More disclosures of unpleasant feelings led to less marital satisfaction in recent studies of marital satisfaction, and disclosure is affected the minute a relationship is stressed, as feelings of less attachment to a spouse promote decreased self-disclosure. Less intimacy leads to more negative disclosures. However, findings by Tolstedt and Stokes (1984) suggest that the depth of self-disclosure actually increases as the intimacy of a relationship decreases. The breadth of disclosure decreased with decreasing intimacy as originally predicted, but couples actually disclosed more deeply. It is speculated that these results came about because a strained relationship causes spouses to restrict their topics of communication (breadth, but that they are also more willing to discuss deeply intimate subjects: negative ones. Thus, while they were sharing more deeply, it was mostly in a negative light. The researchers then speculated that people might actually avoid disclosing very personal facts in the most satisfying relationships because they are fearful that their positive relationships will be negatively affected.

Several factors have been studied to see how they affect one's likelihood to self-disclose. Being shy decreases self-disclosure. Among men, those who are or appear more "tough" are less likely to disclose and express themselves. One's mood, positive or negative, also affects how he or she reveals information. A positive mood has been found to increase disclosure, though it can also be said that being distressed, anxious, or fearful (which would be classified as negative mood states) can accelerate disclosure as well. The exception to this is loneliness, for lonely individuals have shown decreased rates of self-disclosure. Motivation for disclosure is also critical: does the individual need to present himself or herself in a certain way in order to gain certain benefits, and does the self-disclosure match the person's sense of ideal self? We like to present ourselves in ways that we feel are congruent with our own self-concepts, and what we tell others about ourselves often becomes how we actually are. Whether or not one sex shares more readily is a heated debate in social psychology, but it has been found that sex-role identities play a large part. Androgynous people have been found to disclose more intimately across contexts than did notably masculine and feminine people.

In therapy, nearly every school of thought is in agreement that self-disclosure is a necessary element of therapeutic technique. Self-disclosure by the therapist is often thought to facilitate increased disclosure by the client, which should result in increased understanding of the problem at hand. It helps to acknowledge the therapeutic relationship as a fundamental healing source. An alliance between client and therapist is founded on self-disclosure from both parties. In some respects it is similar to modeling appropriate social behavior. Establishing common interests between therapists and clients is useful to maintain a degree of reality.

It is useful to discuss personal matters for a variety of reasons. One will often see his or her disclosure in a more positive perspective if it is shared with someone else. It is thought that disclosing the details of a traumatic experience can greatly help with the organization of related thoughts and is healing in the process of retelling itself. An understanding between therapist and client is achieved when the client can share his or her perceptions without feeling threatened by judgments or unwanted advice. Further, expressing emotions lessens the tollof the autonomic nervous system and has been shown in several studies to improve overall physical health in this way. The disclosure need not be verbal to be advantageous, as writing about truamas and positive experiences alike has been seen to produce less psychological and physiological distress. The PPennebaker Writing Disclosure Paradigm is a commonly used method in therapy settings to facilitate writing about one's experiences. Exposure theory also offers support in that reliving and talking about a negative event should help the negative affect be more accepted by the individual overtime through extinction.

Studies have also shown the disadvantageous effects of keeping secrets, for they serve as stressors over time. Concealing one's thoughts, actions, or ailments does not allow a therapist to deal with the problem. Unwanted, recurrent thoughts, feelings of anxiousness and depression, sleeping problems, and many other physiological, psychological, and physical issues have been seen as the results of withholding important information from others.

The atmosphere in which the therapy takes place in crucial too. Research shows that "soft" architecture and decor in a room promotes disclosure from clients. This is achieved with rugs, framed photos, and mellow lighting. It is thought that this environment more closely imitates the setting friends would share feelings, and so the same might be facilitated between counselor and client. Further, a room should not be too crowded nor too small. EHerman2015 (talk) 02:23, 19 October 2013 (UTC)

In childhoodStudies have tried to profile adolescences to discover who is more likely to self-disclose and what he or she is likely to be disclosing. There is evidence that females disclose more than males, especially to their mothers. However, males might more often disclose information to their parents about risk-taking events and interests. Disclosure to adolescences' parents was found to be positively correlated with their reports of positive relationships with their parents. They report better feelings of trust, warmth, and acceptance. Research by Sally B. Hunter identifies certain specific reasons that adolescents disclose what they do to their parents. Other studies look for reasons children disclose to their parents and reasons they choose not to. Generally, disclosure is avoided if the parental reaction is expected to be negative in that the parents would disprove or punish the child. Children also noted that they feared overprotection from parents if they were to tell them more. It seems also that the ways in which parents might ask their children for disclosure information could yield stronger, deeper disclosure if asked with a sense of acceptance and warmth. Children perceive this more than originally thought when choosing whether or not to self-disclose to their parents. However, in contrast, it was also noted that sometimes spontaneous child self-disclosure is more valuable to parents than is prying for the information.

Using the references above and others yet to be added, we hope to create a more substantial article for this topic.

Feedback on revision
For self disclosure social media, be sure to see research by Katelyn McKenna. I would also suggest putting the social media section at the end, as this is more an application of this research to a specific social context. The reciprocity section has a lot of good information in it, but currently feels a little bit disconnected, jumping around from one research finding to the next.Gseidman (talk) 20:04, 14 October 2013 (UTC)

Peer Review
A read through should be done just to fix some grammatical errors. There are some sentences which are missing words; therefore the idea is unclear. Certain sentences stating research findings have a strong tone so making sure that citations are clear in those spots will eliminated any doubt of fact and the skepticism of personal opinion. The article is very thorough and educational. I am unsure though that an average individual would be able to follow along with the article just based on the wordiness of sections. There is a repetition of the word “disclosure” in certain spots. Just for flow, possibly another word could be used if possible and uncomplicate. Perhaps to get out of the repetition of ideas which occurs throughout the article a section could be created that is dedicated to the importance of self-disclosure in general everyday life-not just for each subtopic. Also, I think that the main topics should be more noticeable with their sub topics being easier to see as the sub topics of the main topic, if that makes sense. So just a quick change to formatting. Remember to link words to their pages using , to help readers clarify a word or concept. For instance, "spouse" or "therapeutic relationship." Overall, the article is to the point and a valid way for people to become educated on the topic of Self Disclosure. I liked the bullet points towards the bottom of the article which list significant variable and traits that impact self disclosure. The authors did a very good job organizing the paper and including the significant aspects of the topic. BKeehan001 (talk) 23:22, 24 November 2013 (UTC)

I agree with Bailey, there are a few grammatical errors in the article. There were a few sentences where the wording seemed a little odd and I had to re-read it to fully understand what you were trying to say, though that could just be me. The order of your paper works very well, I believe it flows nicely from one topic to the next. This article is very well written and does a great job in summarizing the research found about this topic. There are a wide range of topics covered in talking about self-disclosure,which is great. The tone of the article seems neutral to me. Jboone21 (talk) 05:10, 25 November 2013 (UTC)

Comments on content and organization
Lead paragraph: The first paragraph in this section needs a citation. In the second paragraph, I would say “According to social penetration theory, there are two dimensions to self-disclosure…” and I would cite the original work on social penetration theory, not work that expands upon and uses the theory as the idea comes from the original theory, not the later authors that you have cited. Make sure to use be careful about whom you attribute things to throughout the article. Give credit to those who first propounded an idea or conducted a study, not to those who repeat the ideas of those original authors (note that they would cite the original authors in their own work to give credit for these ideas and original citations can be tracked down via these secondary sources).

General comments: In most cases, when referring to a theory by name, you should not use the word “the”. For example, you should say “according to social penetration theory” instead of “according to the social penetration theory”. Also many of the general suggestions from BKeehan001 are useful.

Reciprocity: Make sure to define the term reciprocity early in this section, that reciprocity in self-disclosure means that when one person self-discloses to another, that other person self-discloses in turn. This is actually not entirely clear from reading this section. The first paragraph of this section could be broken down into multiple paragraphs to make it easier to read.

In marriage: This sentence is too technical: “Significant positive relationships have been found between multiple measures of relationship satisfaction (Marriage Adjustment Inventory and Marital Assessment Questionnaire) and the levels of spouses' disclosure on the Social Penetration Scale.” The names of the scales are not useful to a novice; better to simply state what they measure without naming them. It is not clear how the research described relates to positive illusions (as stated in the middle of the first paragraph).

Factors contributing to self disclosure: It seems to me that there are so many findings here they must have come from multiple studies from multiple sources, yet they are cited as coming from the same source, in particular there seem to be three ideas here: shyness, congruence with self concept, and sex roles. Please double check the source of these findings.

Therapists’ reasons to share information: Does the first sentence refer to some sort of survey of therapists? This is unclear with the use of the word “reported”.

History: The word “Still” followed by a period appears between the 2nd and 3rd sentences. When discussing the work of Ferenczi, Ferenczi’s original work should be cited. Link to the Wiki article on object relations theory when it is mentioned in this section – See if any of the other schools of thought referenced in this section have their own Wiki page, and if so, link them. Generally this section could also use more citations to the original work of the theorists in question (e.g., cite the humanistic theorists).

Benefits: Watkins is cited without a reference to anything written by Watkins. Pennebaker’s work is cited without referencing anything by Pennebaker. No references for exposure theory either. These are just some examples. Check the whole article for these issues – Make sure to give credit where credit is due. Do not “second-hand” cite. Cite both types of sources (you can have multiple citations for the same sentence with side by side footnotes).

During childhood: Use the word children, rather than kids. The section “factors of influence” should be called something like “factors influencing self-disclosure in children”, so that it’s clearer what this section is about. Bullet lists are fine, but there should be a sentence or two before the bullet list to introduce it. Also, factors that facilitate disclosure and factors that encourage future disclosures seem almost like the same idea. So the sentences introducing those bullet lists should provide some justification for why these are separated. Also there is no clear citation for these lists.

I think the self disclosure of children online section should be a subsection of the social media section.

Self-disclosure and social media: I would re-title this “Self-disclosure on the Internet” or “… in computer-mediated communication” because social media refers to a narrower set of online interaction venues than the research you’re citing and is a relatively recent term that post-dates some of the research you’re discussing. I would not make consequences of anonymity a separate section, just incorporate into the section on anonymity. I would also think the Internet section could be divided into more main sections: 1) Features of online interaction affecting disclosure (This would describe those 4 factors: anonymity, control of pace, etc.) and 2) Individual differences in online self disclosure (this would contain the subheadings of self-esteem loneliness, and social anxiety. Then you'd have your other subsection as they currently are. Additionally, there are better sources for some of these topics. For example, for social anxiety look for other work by McKenna (e.g., McKenna, Green, & Gleason, 2002) and work by Amichai-Hamburger, where social anxiety is tested directly. Too much of this section comes from a single source. Gseidman (talk) 01:03, 3 December 2013 (UTC)

Proposed Topic: Self-Disclosure in Education
The proposed addition to this page is for a education class project demonstrating knowledge on culture within education and looking at a variety of educational methods to promote a strong education. The educational method we are addressing is how self-disclosure plays a role in education. We will be looking specifically at the student teacher relationship and how much self-disclosure is necessary to form a strong, and appropriate bond. This can vary depending on the culture of the society and what the social norms are for the people involved. The page currently addresses how self-disclosure is involved in intimate relationships, in therapy situation, during childhood, and in cyber interactions. We felt that it would be useful and engaging to discuss both sides of this highly controversial and debatable topic. This contribution would be extremely beneficial because it would be advantageous for prospective teachers to understand the issues involved with self-disclosure, the problems to be aware of, and the rewards of properly implementing this communication tool in the classroom. The Wikipedia page would benefit from this contribution because it is lacking in addressing areas that involved formal education or workplace environments. This is a common and essential communication device used in all relationships and it is important to address how it should be retrofitted to meet the needs of the classroom. It is also important to understand that different cultures have varying perspectives and values regarding self-disclosure in all aspects of life, especially in the classroom.

Bgka2016 (talk) 17:43, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Communication Theory
— Assignment last updated by Kwv2014 (talk) 20:08, 27 November 2023 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: Criticism as Praxis
— Assignment last updated by Hut-sti (talk) 03:54, 29 April 2024 (UTC)