Self-disclosure Flashcards
Self-disclosure.
Revealing personal information about yourself.
Romantic relationships reveal more about their true selves as their relationships develops. These self-disclosures about one’s deepest thoughts and feelings can strengthen a romantic bond when used appropriately.
Social penetration theory.
Self-disclosure major aspect of Altman and Taylor’s (1971) theory of how relationships develop.
Is the gradual process of revealing your inner self to someone else, of giving away your deepest thoughts and feelings.
(romantic relationships) involves the reciprocal exchange of information between intimate partners.
As partners increasingly disclose more and more, romantic partners ‘penetrate’ more deeply into each other’s lives, and gain greater understanding of each other.
Self-disclosure has 2 elements:
Breadth and Depth.
As both breadth and depth increase,…
romantic partners become more committed to each other.
Breadth of disclosure is narrow, because…
Many topics are ‘off-limits’ in the early stage of a relationship.
As a relationship develops,…
Self-disclosure becomes deeper, progressively removing more and more layers to reveal our true selves and encompassing a wider range of topics, especially concerning those things that matter most to us. Eventually, we are prepared to reveal intimate, high-risk information - painful memories and experiences, strongly-held beliefs, perhaps even secrets.
Depenetration.
To describe how dissatisfied partners self-disclose less as they gradually disengage from the relationship.
Reciprocity of self-disclosure.
Reis and Shaver (1988) - need of a reciprocal exchange to disclose.
Once you have decided to disclose something that reveals your true self, hopefully, your partner will respond in a way that is rewarding, with empathy and also their own intimate thoughts and feelings.
There is a balance of self-disclosure between both partners in a successful romantic relationship, which increases feelings of intimacy and deepens the relationship.
Limitation: This theory is not true for all cultures that increasing depth and breadth of self-disclosure lead to a more satisfying and intimate romantic relationship.
Nu Tang et al (2013) reviewed research into sexual self-disclosure; they concluded that men and women in the US self-disclose significantly more sexual thoughts and feelings than men and women in China. Despite lower levels of disclosure in China, levels of satisfaction were no different from those in the US.
Therefore self-disclosure theory is a limited explanation of romantic relationships because it is based on findings from individualistic cultures which aren’t necessarily generalisable to other cultures.
Strength: Research into self-disclosure can help people who want to improve communication in their relationships.
Romantic partners sometimes use self-disclosure deliberately to increase intimacy and strengthen their bond. Stephen Haas and Laura Stafford (1998) found that 57% of homosexual men and women said that open and honest self-disclosure was the main way that they maintained and deepened their relationships. If less-skilled partners learn to use self-disclosure then this could bring several benefits to their relationships in terms of deepening satisfaction and commitment.
This shows that psychological insights can be valuable in helping people who are having problems in their relationships.
Strength (includes counterpoint): Several predictions about self-disclosure derived from social penetration theory have been supported by research.
Sprecher and Hendrick (2004) studied heterosexual dating couples and found strong correlations between several measures of satisfaction and self-disclosure for both partners. Men and women who used self-disclosure were more satisfied with and committed to their romantic relationships. In a later study, Sprecher et al (2013) showed that relationships are closer and more satisfying when partners take turns to self-disclose. These supportive research findings increase the validity of the theory that reciprocated self-disclosure leads to more satisfying relationships.
Much self-disclosure research is correlational, including Sprecher and Hendrick’s study. It is usually assumed that greater self-disclosure creates more satisfaction but a correlation does not tell us if this is a valid conclusion to draw. Alternative explanations are just as likely. For instance, it may be that the more satisfied the partners are, the more likely they self-disclose; or perhaps self-disclosure and satisfaction are independent of each other and both are caused by a third variable. This could be the amount of time the partners spend together.
Therefore self-disclosures may not cause satisfaction directly, reducing the validity of social penetration theory of self-disclosure.
Strength: There is further research support for the role of self-disclosure as a factor affecting attraction in romantic relationships.
Laurenceau et al. (2005) asked participants to write a daily diary entry about their relationship. They found that self-disclosure, and perception of disclosure in a partner, led to greater feelings of intimacy. The reverse was true as well - couples who complained about a lack of intimacy self-disclosed less often. This, therefore, suggests that self-disclosure does, in fact, play an important role in deepening intimacy and feelings of attraction towards a romantic partner.
IDA.
Social Penetration Theory is unable to adequately explain the formation of all types of relationships and is limited by taking a nomothetic approach. By claiming that higher self-disclosure will invariably lead to greater relationship satisfaction, this theory ignores many other factors that can influence relationships, such as cultural practices and personality. Furthermore, by reducing relationship satisfaction to a single factor, Social Penetration Theory ignores many other aspects of romantic attraction, such as physical attractiveness, the similarity of attitudes, and complementarity. This suggests that research into romantic relationships could benefit from the use of an idiographic approach that studies couples* unique experiences in detail, rather than trying to establish a set of laws that apply to all couples.
