What is self-disclosure? |

Introduction

Self-disclosure is the process of communicating personal information to another
individual. It involves a willingness to reveal intimate thoughts and feelings
rather than superficial or obvious characteristics. Scientists studying personal
relationships have found that, as two people become acquainted and interact over
time, they reveal more of themselves to each other. For example, when two people
first know each other, their conversation may be limited to the weather, mutual
interests, and similarly “safe” topics. The topics they discuss are neutral, and
the feelings they express are matters of public knowledge. As their relationship
develops, they feel comfortable disclosing more intimate feelings and experiences.
Later in their friendship, their conversation may be entirely about their
feelings, personal problems, and other experiences that are not public knowledge.
Self-disclosure is the process by which communication in a relationship becomes
more private and intimate.

The term “self-disclosure” was introduced by psychologist Sidney Jourard in his
1964 book The Transparent Self: Self-Disclosure and Well-Being.
Early work by therapists and researchers speculated that self-disclosure is
essential for the health and growth of personal relationships; however, not all
self-disclosures serve to promote relationships. Disclosures can be distinguished
as either appropriate or inappropriate. Healthy intimacy is
promoted when one’s self-disclosure suits the time and the place as well as the
relationship. When two people are close friends, for example, it is appropriate
for them to reveal personal information or feelings to each other.

In contrast, confessing intimate feelings or confiding personal experiences to
a stranger or mild acquaintance is often considered inappropriate. Personal
revelations are often too intimate for those interactions. Such inappropriate
self-disclosure may elicit withdrawal or rejection by others. Self-disclosure can
also be inappropriate because it is not intimate enough. For example, if two
long-time friends converse about their lives and one refuses to tell the other
about a problem because it is somewhat personal, the other may feel rejected or
slighted. Because of their history as friends, personal confidences are
appropriate, while nondisclosure is not.

Levels of Communication

The quality of self-disclosure was considered in the 1973 book Social
Penetration: The Development of Interpersonal Relationships, by Irwin
Altman and Dalmas Taylor. Altman and Taylor argued that, as a relationship
develops, communication between partners increases in two qualities or dimensions:
breadth and depth. Breadth increases before depth. Communication becomes broader
as partners add more topic areas to their conversation. Eventually the two
people’s communication also deepens: Their interaction becomes less superficial
and more intimate. For example, two people whose early friendship is based on a
common interest in music will discover other things in common (greater breadth) as
they communicate. Eventually, they not only talk about what they mutually enjoy
but also confide in each other and help each other solve problems (greater
depth).

Altman and Taylor argue that most relationships develop in a more satisfactory
way when self-disclosure proceeds (breadth before depth) over time; however, not
all individuals conform to this model. For example, some persons are low
revealers, unable to proceed to more personal levels of communication over time.
Others are high revealers, indiscriminately disclosing too much to others,
irrespective of the exact relationships or interactions between them. Disclosing
too little prevents a relationship from becoming more intimate and may result in
its termination. Disclosing too much signals intrusiveness rather than intimacy,
and it usually causes others to withdraw rather than to respond with equal
intimacy.

Healthy self-disclosure adheres to a norm of reciprocity—the expectation that partners will exchange disclosures, taking turns revealing similar levels of intimacy. For example, if one partner confides to the other, “I am worried that I might not succeed in reaching this goal,” the other can reciprocate by admitting similar feelings or understanding the fear of failure. It would not be reciprocal to change the subject or offer superficial reassurance such as, “I know you will do just fine.” Self-disclosure is risky, because it makes the revealer more vulnerable to the confidant’s rejection or ridicule. Reciprocal self-disclosure establishes trust, since partners are confiding on similar levels and their knowledge of each other is balanced.

As relationships develop, Altman has argued, immediate reciprocity becomes
unnecessary, because trust has already been established. Thus, long-time friends
can have nonreciprocal conversations without threatening their level of intimacy.
In a particular interaction, one partner may confide while the other listens
without reciprocating. They both know that their roles can be reversed in some
future conversation.

Disclosure depends on the style as well as the content of communication. An
individual may wish to discuss a personal problem or concern with a friend but not
know how to express himself or herself effectively. The complaint, “Sometimes
things can be very hard for a person to deal with,” is more vague and less
disclosing than the statement, “I feel very frustrated and need help solving a
problem.” In this example, the former disclosure is closed and impersonal while
the latter is more open and personal. To be open and personal, self-disclosing
statements should be relevant to the immediate situation, expressed in personal
terms (“I feel” rather than “People say”), specifically addressed to the listener,
clearly explanatory rather than vague or hinting, and specific rather than
general.

Role in Relationships

Differences in patterns of self-disclosure can account for differences in relationship development, conflict, personal distress, and loneliness. Individual differences in self-disclosure—the fact that some people are high revealers and others low revealers—help explain why some relationships become more intimate while others never progress. For example, a low revealer may feel unable to reciprocate when a new friend confides a secret or problem. The nondiscloser may be unsure of the other’s response to a personal revelation, fearful of rejection, or unable to express himself or herself. The friend who has confided in the nondiscloser is left feeling unsatisfied or mistrustful by the lack of response and may discourage future interactions.

In contrast, a high revealer’s indiscriminate disclosures can offend others. Overdisclosing to a stranger can cause him or her to withdraw and terminate any further interaction. Even friends can be disturbed by a high revealer’s willingness to confide inappropriately to others besides themselves. Their own confidences in the overdiscloser may also seem to be at risk. Differences in people’s willingness and ability to engage in self-disclosure can affect the success and development of their relationships.

Research and theory on self-disclosure contribute to a larger body of work on communication in close relationships. The study of relationships combines the observations and perspectives of social psychology, sociology, counseling, and communication studies. Early work in this multidisciplinary field focused on how relationships begin, including motivations for affiliation and factors in interpersonal attraction. Researchers have since turned their attention to relationship development and maintenance, processes dependent on the quality and quantity of partners’ communication. Self-disclosure is a central goal of intimate communication. An understanding of self-disclosure and its role in developing and maintaining intimacy is essential to improving and stabilizing the significant relationships in people’s lives.

Exceptions to Self-Disclosure Rules

Two kinds of interactions may appear to violate the rules of developing
self-disclosure: brief intimate encounters and love at first sight. In the first
case, a brief interaction with a stranger involves unusually deep self-disclosure.
Psychologist Zick Rubin has dubbed this the Fort Lauderdale phenomenon, for the
Florida city that is a popular destination for spring vacation travel. A college
student on vacation may feel less inhibited about self-disclosure with others
encountered there, because he or she will not see any of these people again. Thus,
high levels of self-disclosure are possible because no future relationship is
anticipated.

In love at first sight, two people may become quickly and mutually attracted
and communicate intimately with each other with the intention of maintaining their
relationship in the future. Altman and Taylor warn, however, that the two
individuals have no history of communication, so no trust has been established
between them. The risk of conflict is high, and conflict is likely to be more
destructive than if the relationship had been established more gradually. Thus,
disclosing too much too fast can doom a relationship even when disclosure is
reciprocal and when both partners have similar motives.

Role in Psychological Well-Being

The relationship between psychological adjustment
and quantity or amount of self-disclosure has been explored by Valerian Derlega
and Alan Chaikin in their 1975 book Sharing Intimacy: What We Reveal to
Others and Why. Derlega and Chaikin suggest that adjustment is a
curvilinear (changing) function of self-disclosure, rather than a linear
(constant) one. A person’s adjustment does not continually increase as the amount
that he or she self-discloses increases. Initially, as self-disclosure increases
from low to medium levels, adjustment also improves—up to a point. Beyond that
optimal point, increasing from medium to high self-disclosure actually reduces
psychological adjustment. In other words, disclosing too much can interfere with a
person’s well-being and relationship success.

Self-disclosure is important to psychological well-being. Friends value being
able to talk to and be themselves with each other. Intimacy involves more than
being honest and revealing secrets, however; it is possible to express oneself
about personal concerns without participating in an intimate relationship. For
example, one may keep a diary or confide in a pet. There are also some
relationships that have no expectation of reciprocity. A patient or client must
describe personal experiences and feelings to a physician or psychotherapist
without expecting him or her to respond in kind. In these contexts, it is helpful
to be able to express oneself honestly without fear of rejection or criticism.
Research evidence confirms that the process of articulating and confiding one’s
concerns significantly helps in coping with stress and
trauma. Diaries and professional relationships are not a substitute for real
intimacy, however; genuine intimacy is an outcome of communication within
relationships, not of one-sided expression. Confiding in others who are willing to
listen is essential to gaining the benefits of social
support.

Issues of Intimacy

Personal relationships are based on interdependence—the reliance of both parties on joint outcomes. Reciprocity in self-disclosure represents a mutual investment that builds such interdependence. Withholding a confidence at one extreme and overdisclosing at the other are both hindrances to satisfactory intimacy. People who fail to establish and maintain intimacy with others experience loneliness. Loneliness is defined as the experience of inadequate or insufficient relationships. People feel lonely when they have fewer relationships than are wanted or when existing relationships fail to meet their needs. A pattern of inappropriate or inexpressive self-disclosure can ultimately lead one to experience chronic loneliness.

Training in social skills may help those who suffer the consequences of
unsatisfactory relationships or loneliness. Individuals could be taught, in psychotherapy or support
groups, to modify their self-disclosure. Overdisclosers could become selective in
choosing their confidants, and low revealers could learn how to express themselves
more openly and personally. Like other relationship skills, self-disclosure
requires motivation and competence but contributes to better
communication and higher self-esteem.

Influences and Evolution of Study

Research on self-disclosure was influenced by the human potential movement of
the 1960s and 1970s. Early theorists such as Jourard argued that it is important
to be able to reveal aspects of oneself to a few significant others. Work by
Altman and Taylor and by Derlega and Chaikin extended the concept of
self-disclosure into the context of personal relationships and communication. Work
conducted in the 1970s and 1980s explored the ways people choose topics and levels
in disclosing to others. Self-disclosure has come to be regarded more as an aspect
of interpersonal communication than of self-development. Whether a disclosure is
appropriate depends on the relationship of the discloser to the listener and on
the expectations of both individuals.

Altman and Taylor’s theory of social penetration recognizes
that self-disclosure involves changes in both the quantity and quality of intimate
communication. Later research has concentrated on identifying the qualities of
appropriate and healthy communication. An understanding of how self-disclosure is
developed and how it contributes to communication is important in the study of
close relationships; identifying problems in self-disclosure can lead to solving
those problems. Research on loneliness has led to the development of social-skills
training programs. Similarly, self-disclosure skills can be improved with
education based on an understanding of intimate communication.

Bibliography

Adler, Ronald B.,
Lawrence B. Rosenfeld, and Neil Towne. Interplay: The Process of
Interpersonal Communication. 11th ed. New York: Oxford UP, 2009.
Print.

Altman, Irwin, and
Dalmas A. Taylor. Social Penetration: The Development of
Interpersonal Relationships. New York: Holt, 2006.
Print.

Brehm, Sharon S.
Intimate Relationships. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill,
2006. Print.

Brewer, Gayle, Loren Abell, and Minna Lyons.
"Machiavellianism, Competition, and Self-Disclosure in Friendship."
Individual Differences Research 12.1 (2014): 1–7.
Print.

Derlega, Valerian,
Sandra Metts, Sandra Petronio, and Steven Margulies, eds.
Self-Disclosure. Thousand Oaks: Sage, 1993.
Print.

Duck, Steve.
Relating to Others. 2nd ed. Buckingham: Open UP, 1999.
Print.

Eunjung Lee. "A Therapist's Self-Disclosure
and Its Impact on the Therapy Process in Cross-Cultural Encounters:
Disclosure of Personal Self, Professional Self, and/or Cultural Self?"
Families in Society 95.1 (2014): 15–23.
Print.

Knapp, Mark L., and
Anita L. Vangelisti. Interpersonal Communication and Human
Relationships. 6th ed. Boston: Allyn, 2009. Print.

Stoltz, Molly, Raymond W. Young, Kevin L.
Bryant. "Can Teacher Self-Disclosure Increase Student Cognitive Learning?"
College Student Journal 48.1 (2014): 166–72.
Print.

Voncken M., and K. Dijk. "Socially Anxious
Individuals Get a Second Chance after Being Disliked at First Sight: The
Role of Self-Disclosure in the Development of Likeability in Sequential
Social Contact." Cognitive Therapy and Research 37.1
(2013): 7–17. Print.