Culture and self disclosure relationship

Self-disclosure - Wikipedia

culture and self disclosure relationship

Cultural influence on self-disclosure 1 The influence of cultural background and the influence of culture is prevalent among strangers and casual relationships, . cultures and for intercultural collaboration. Author Keywords. Self-disclosure, communication mode, relationship, culture, social networking. Self-disclosure is a process of communication by which one person reveals information about Too rapid, too personal disclosure creates an imbalance in a relationship that can be discomfiting. This gradual process Self-disclosure, just like anything varies and differs depending on the culture. Collectivistic culture and.

Concealing one's thoughts, actions, or ailments does not allow a therapist to examine and work through the client's problem.

Unwanted, recurrent thoughts, feelings of anxiousness and depressionsleeping problems, and many other physiological, psychological, and physical issues have been seen as the results of withholding important information from others. Therapy sessions for personality disordersbehavior disordersimpulse control disordersand psychotic disorders seem to use therapist self-disclosure far less often.

Their likability was increased by their willingness to disclose to their clients. The three dimensions mentioned have been said to be of utmost importance when determining one's likability.

Additionally, a therapist who discloses too frequently risks losing focus in the session, talking too much about himself or herself and not allowing the client to actually harvest the benefits of the disclosures in the session through client-focused reflection.

Research shows that "soft" architecture and decor in a room promotes disclosure from clients.

Culture and Sexual Self-Disclosure in Intimate Relationships

This is achieved with rugs, framed photos, and mellow lighting. It is thought that this environment more closely imitates the setting in which 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 in order to foster good disclosures from the client [1] Effectiveness[ edit ] The efficacy of self-disclosure is widely debated by researchers, and findings have yielded a variety of results, both positive and negative.

A typical method of researching such ideas involves self-reports of both therapists and clients. The evaluations of therapists on the positive effects of their own disclosures is far less positive than that of clients' self-reports.

Clients are especially likely to assert that the disclosures of their therapists help in their recovery if the disclosures are perceived as more intimate in content. Much of these results, however, are linked to how skilled the therapist is in disclosing.

Therapists must choose wisely in what they disclose and when. A client who is suffering greatly or facing a horrific crisis is not likely to benefit much from therapist self-disclosures.

If a client at any point feels he or she, should be acting as a source of support to the therapist, disclosure is only hindering the healing process. Further, clients might become overwhelmed if their initial ideas of therapy do not include any degree of self-disclosure from their counselor, and this will not lead to successful therapy sessions either.

It is also a risk to reveal too much about a therapist because the client may begin to see the healer as flawed and untrustworthy. Clients should not feel like they are in competition for time to speak and express themselves during therapy sessions. The American Psychological Association supports the technique, calling it "promising and probably effective".

Using "I" statementsa therapist emits a certain level of care not otherwise felt by many clients, and they are likely to benefit from this feeling of being cared for.

In cases of a therapist needing to provide feedback, self-involving statements are nearly inevitable, for he or she must state a true opinion of what the client has disclosed.

These sorts of "I" statements, when used correctly and professionally, are usually seen as especially validating by clients. Largely, the use of self-involving statements by therapists is seen as a way of making the interaction more authentic for the client, and such exchanges can have a great impact on the success of the treatment at hand. Spouses are encouraged, or even required, to disclose unexpressed emotions and feelings to their partners.

The partners' responses are practiced to be nonjudgmental and accepting. Therapists utilize techniques like rehearsal and the teaching of listening skills. Some fear that this is of little long-term help to the couple because in their real lives, there is no mediator or guiding therapist's hand when one is disclosing to another.

Goals like these, as reported by young people fairly universally, can affect how they disclose to their parents to a large degree. Some go so far as to use the rate of self-disclosure between parents and children as a dominant measure of the strength of their relationship and its health. When information is withheld, distance is created and closeness is nearly impossible to facilitate.

Teens pick and choose what to tell their parents, thus limiting their control over the teens' daily activities. Adolescents' unique preferences and interests are expressed. If these vary from their parents', they establish an identity of their own. Thus, they moderate their parents' potential reactions.

Because of this, it is important for parents to be aware of how they react to their children's disclosures, for these reactions will be used as judgment calls for the children's' future sharing. Other times a reason is that the children do not want their parents to worry about them, and this is called parent-centered disclosures.

Disclosing in order to make oneself feel better or to ensure protection from parents is considered to be another reason for youth to disclose, and it is called self-oriented disclosure. On a more manipulative level, some adolescents report telling their parents things based solely on gaining an advantage of some sort, whether this is the right to reveal less or the fact that being more open tends to result in more adolescent privileges.

Sometimes children qualify their disclosures by merely stating that they only disclose what they feel they want to their parents. Thus, some information is kept secret. This is dubbed selective self-disclosure. In sum, adolescents feel different pulls that make them self-disclose to their parents that can be based on the parents' needs and the children's needs.

There has not been a distinct pattern found to predict which reasons will be utilized to explain disclosures by different children. For this reason it is widely believed that the reason for disclosure is largely situation- and context- dependent.

Parental knowledge of their children's whereabouts and daily lives has been linked to several positive outcomes. The more parents know about their kids, the lower the rate of behavior problems among children, and the higher the children's well-being. Adolescents who disclose have been found to have lower rates of substance abuselower rates of risky sexual behaviors, lower anxiety levels, and lower rates of depression. It has been shown that children's understanding of friendship involves sharing secrets with another person.

This mutual exchange of sharing secrets could be the norm of reciprocity, in which individuals disclose because it is a social norm. This norm of reciprocity is shown to begin occurring for children in sixth grade.

Sixth graders are able to understand the norm of reciprocity because they realize that relationships require both partners to cooperate and to mutually exchange secrets. They realize this because they possess the cognitive ability to take another person's perspective into account and are able to understand a third person's views which allows them to view friendships as an ongoing systematic relationship. Equivalent reciprocity requires matching the level of intimacy a partner discloses, therefore, a high-intimacy disclosure would be matched with an equally revealing disclosure while a low-intimacy disclosure would be matched with little information revealed.

Another type of reciprocity is covariant reciprocity, in which disclosures are more intimate if a partner communicates a high-intimacy disclosure instead of a low-intimacy disclosure. This differs from equivalent reciprocity, which matches the level of intimacy, while covariant reciprocity only focuses on whether someone disclosed something personal or not.

Covariant reciprocity is shown to begin in fourth grade. The first is intraindividual factors, which are those that are on the child's mind and cause him or her to need social input.

Biological development, cultural and social pressures, and individual maturity determine these issues, and, thus, a child's age, personality, and background also contribute to his or her level and need of self-disclose in a relationship with a parent.

These are most directly related, then, to the target of the disclosure; these targets are the parents. These are called high openers. Even people known to disclose very little are likely to disclose more to high openers.

Thus, if parents are characterized as good listeners, trustworthy, accepting, relaxed, and sympathetic, as are high openers, then they will likely elicit more disclosure from their children. Adolescents who view their parents like this are also said to see them as less controlling and less likely to react negatively to their disclosures.

Parental responsiveness has been said to be the dominant factor of influence on adolescents' rates of self-disclosure; warmth and affection facilitate more disclosures.

While this sort of control is not often thought of in a positive light, some hypothesize that these kids are likely just feeling coerced to disclose subtly and without being harmed.

Much of what children choose to reveal to their parents is based on previous disclosures and their parents' reactions to them. A child with a positive memory of his or her relationship with a parent during the past years is a predictor of a higher level of self-disclosure.

In fact, the view of the parent-child relationship in the past is a stronger predictor than that of the child's view of the current parent-child relationship.

The relationship with the mother, in particular, is extremely predictive of disclosures from adolescents. Such findings suggest to parents that fostering secure attachment early in their children will better set the stage for disclosures in the later years, and their children may then reap the benefits of such a relationship. They actively resist disclosing this to their parents because they do not see the issues as being harmful, or they feel their parents will not listen to them, or because the matters are very private to them.

The more authority the children believe their parents rightly possess, the more obligation they perceive to share their lives accordingly. Not surprising either, less obligation is felt as age increases.

The age at which children feel they no longer are obligated to disclose to their parents has increased over time, and the same trend is predicted over the next few decades. Adolescents also want to disclose more if they feel that the activities in question are out of their own jurisdiction.

Jurisdiction is measured, in the adolescents' minds, as how short-term and close the activities are. Short-term, close activities are judged as ones to be handled without disclosure to parents, while activities that will take longer or require the adolescent to be farther from home are thought of as being issues to discuss with parents.

Nervous, angry, or unhappy parents make children less likely to disclose [30] Preoccupied: Parents who do not seem accessible to their children do not receive good disclosures [30] Reluctance: When parents seem unwilling to talk about problems or consistently avoid certain topics of conversation [30] Questioning: Adolescents are bothered by persistent questions that their parents ask of them [30] Respect: Children do not disclose as much if they feel their parents are not taking them seriously [30] Nagging: When parents seem to hag on unimportant matters, children become frustrated [30] Previous disapproval: Adolescents are not likely to disclose if their parents have previously expressed disapproval of a matter they wish to discuss [30] Factors that discourage future disclosures[ edit ] Certain events and characteristics of the parent-child relationship make the child less willing to disclose to that parent in the future: If parents seem inattentive, the child is not likely to try to disclose in the future [30] Respect: Parents who make jokes about disclosures or tease their children discourage future discussions [30] Lack of trust: Children are not likely to disclose again when parents have shown doubt about their previous disclosures or checked the information that had been revealed [30] Interrupting: Parents who interrupt their children do not encourage future disclosure [30] Lack of relatability: Children will not disclose again if they feel their parents did not try to understand their position in previous disclosures [30] Lack of receptivity: Parents who seem not to care about the child's thoughts on matters and who will not listen to arguments discourage future disclosure [30] Confidentiality: Children feel less inclined to disclose in the future if their parents do not keep their disclosures confidential [30] Emotion: Parents who have angry outbursts do not encourage further disclosures from their children [30] Consequences: Disclosures that resulted in punishment serve has discouragement for future disclosures.

Additionally, long lectures from parents are not viewed as favorable [30] Disappointment: When disclosure has made a parent disappointed or sad in his or her child, the child feels less inclined to disclose again [30] Silence: Parents who respond to a disclosure with the silent treatment are unlikely to facilitate later disclosures [30] Withholding permission: If earlier disclosure resulted in parents withholding permissions for children to participate in their desired activities, the children often do not disclose such information again later [30] Facilitators[ edit ] Certain events and characteristics of the parent-child relationship make disclosures likely: Positive moods happy and relaxed in parents make adolescents likely to begin to disclose [30] Accessibility: When parents seem ready and able to chat without doing other things, children want to disclose to them [30] Opportunities: Parents who make time for the child, initiate conversations, and prompt disclosures perhaps with humor usually facilitate disclosures from their children [30] Reciprocal disclosure: Children are encouraged if their parents choose to reveal things about themselves [30] Questions: Open-ended questions give adolescents motivation to disclose [30] Attention to child's mood: When parents recognize the affective state of a child, the child feels cared for and is likely to be open to discussing the causes of that mood [30] Unconditional disclosure: Children feel encouraged to disclose when parents make a point of telling the child to reveal himself or herself no matter what [30] Pace: Letting children choose how and how fast they disclose makes them more likely to reveal things to their parents [30] Factors that encourage future disclosures[ edit ] Certain events and characteristics of the parent-child relationship make the child more likely to disclose to that parent in the future: Previous disclosures that have made the child feel emotionally supported positively affect whether or not he or she will disclose to a parent again [30] Humor: Parents who can appreciate humor in disclosure, where appropriate, encourage the child to disclose again [30] Reciprocity: A parent who makes an obvious attempt to understand the child's position makes the child more willing to share in the future.

Children will likely disclose again when they believe their parents are giving them their full attention without interruption [30] Appreciations: Parents who express to their adolescents that they value their disclosures encourage such to happen again [30] Respect: Children want to disclose again if they feel their parents take them seriously [30] Confidence in the child: Parents who express their trust in the child's ability to handle his or her problems will likely be disclosed to in the future [30] Trustworthiness: Adolescents will want to reveal information to their parents again if they trust that the disclosure will be confidential [30] Advice: If parents offer good advice and help for a youth's problems, he or she is prompted to discuss things with the parent later on [30] Reactions: Parents will often be told information from their children again if they keep their reactions to disclosures calm [30] Discussion: Children prefer to talk about their issues, so if adults are willing, children will likely open up to them often [30] Receptivity: Adults who consider arguments from the child and "hear him or her out" encourage these children to reveal their thoughts again [30] Results: If permissions for adolescents' wishes have been granted after disclosing in the past, the child is more likely to disclose in the future [30] On the Internet[ edit ] There are four major differences between online communication and face to face communication.

The first is that Internet users can remain anonymous. The user can choose what personal information if any they share with other users.

Even if the user decides to use their own name, if communicating with people in others cities or countries they are still relatively anonymous. The second is that physical distance does not limit interaction on the Internet the way it does in real life. The Internet gives the ability to interact with people all over the world and the chance to meet people who have similar interests that one may not have met in their offline life.

Visual cues, including those pertaining to physical attractiveness, are also not always present on the Internet. These factors have been shown to influence initial attraction and relationship formation.

Finally, Internet users have time to formulate conversations which is not allotted in face to face conversation. This gives a user more control in the conversation because they do not have to give an immediate response. A person might take these risks because they are more aware of their private self. Private self-awareness is when a person becomes more aware of personal features of the self.

This is in contrast to public self-awareness in which a person realizes that they can be judged by others. This type of awareness can lead to evaluation apprehension, where a person fears receiving a negative evaluation from their peers.

Self-disclosure

Public self-awareness is also associated with conforming to group norms even if they go against personal beliefs. This is because the discloser is not worried about being judged publicly and is able to express their own private thoughts. A person can change their gender and the way they relate to others due to anonymity. This can increase life satisfaction because those who can identify with multiple roles are shown to be more satisfied. Since the Internet can allow someone to adopt these roles, that close others may not accept in the real world, it can increase their self-worth and acceptance.

The "true self", as described by McKenna and her colleagues includes the traits a person possesses but is unable to share freely with others. What they do share is the "actual self" which includes traits they do possess and are able to be shown in social settings.

The actual self can be easier to present in face to face conversations because a person's true self may not fit societal norms. Disclosing one's "true self" has been shown to create empathetic bonds and aid in forming close relationships. This can help them in life because it allows them to form a group of similar others and the opportunity to receive emotional support. It has also been found that those who join these groups and disclose their identity were more likely to share this aspect of the self with their close family and friends.

Sharing these long kept secrets has also shown to significantly reduce health symptoms over a length of time. Deindividuationwhere self-awareness is blocked by environmental conditions, can occur and be problematic.

Some consequences of deindividuation include the reduced ability to control one's behavior and engage in rational, long-term planning, and the tendency to react immediately and emotionally.

A person who is lacking this self-awareness is also less likely to care about other's opinions of his or her behavior. This all can lead to increased hostility towards others and the formation of anonymous hate groups. In contrast, citizens in a collective society tend to place more emphasis on the interests and goals of the group than on their own individual goals Ting-Toomey, Markus and Kitayama developed the concepts of independent self and interdependent self to describe different self-concepts among people in various cultures.

For example, North Americans and Europeans, who live in individualistic cultures, often possess an independent self-concept, while Chinese, Japanese, and Latinos, who live in collectivist societies, are assumed to possess an interdependent self-concept. People from individualistic cultures are generally found to be more likely to emphasize their uniqueness, while people from collectivistic cultures tend to refrain from disclosing disagreement in order to maintain group harmony.

Gudykunst and colleagues found that people in individualistic versus collectivist societies engage in low-context and high-context communication, respectively.

culture and self disclosure relationship

Low-context communication emphasizes openness, which requires people to share their personal information with others. Members in collectivist societies may fear imposing on others or hurting others by their self-disclosures. Thus, they may engage in less self-disclosure. By examining the different historical origins and social developments of sexuality in both America and China, we hope to be able to paint pictures of these two cultures in order to better understand why they became so different.

For years, the Catholic Church preached that, even when couples were married, sex was a mortal sin if engaged in for any purpose other than procreation. Classical stories of lovers who broke the rules e. Dido and Aeneas generally ended tragically. Early theologians, such as St. To all this, add fear of pregnancy and death in childbirth, and the picture for women as regards the sexual pleasures grows grimmer. Masturbation was considered unhealthy and abnormal. Gender inequalities in sexuality were pervasive.

Men generally held the power in all aspects of life, including sexuality. Women, who possessed even lower legal status than horses, were, by and large, treated as sexual objects or vehicles for childbirth.

Instead, humanist artists began to treat sex as a natural desire and an expression of the love of life. Sex slowly began to be seen as noble. It was not only spiritual, but also indicative of the unification of body and soul Zhou, Not until well into the 20th century was birth control commonly employed to limit pregnancy—a development that greatly liberated the sexuality of couples, granting them the possibility to enjoy sex with less worry and guilt.

People since then have possessed more open sexual attitudes, and therefore are also more likely to engage in sexual activities than during previous times. From the s to the s, a growing majority of people in the developed world began to consider sex to be a source of excitement, joy, and an expression of love.

Since the s, however, the fear of sexually transmitted infections such as Acquired Immune Deficiency Syndrome AIDS and sexual transmitted infections STIs has motivated many young people to make more conservative choices regarding sexual activities. History is not linear, but the long-term tendency towards acceptance of sexual pleasure for women as well as men would seem very difficult to reverse. In ancient China, the family was not a social institution comprised of independent men and women, but of kin groups.

Sex was not considered a basic need, but existed merely as a means to gain social acceptance. Sexual activities that fit with existing social requirements were considered lawful; otherwise, they were viewed as treason and heresy Liu, For the first 4, years of Chinese history, a Yin-Yang philosophy fostered positive and open attitudes towards human sexuality. It was believed that men ought to change sexual partners with some frequency in order to nurture themselves.

Considerable changes have occurred in the last years—starting in the Song Dynasty A. Much more repressive policies towards sexuality were adopted. Within the family, men and women living in the same household could not sit together, could not hang clothes on the same shelf, could not use the same handkerchief and comb, and could not pass things hand-to-hand Liu,let alone enjoy sexual pleasure together. Since then, through the Ming A. China began a rush toward modernization.

The influence of cultural background and context on self-disclosure | Long Hoang - angelfirenm.info

Chinese citizens can now view lovers hugging, kissing, and even having sex on TV. All these changes have promoted more open attitudes towards sex.

Many Chinese college students now engage in premarital sex. People who score low in sociosexuality are said to possess a restricted sociosexual orientation.

Schmitt found that Chinese from Hong Kong possessed a restricted orientation. We can call this kind of society a sexually conservative society. On the contrary, people who are high in sociosexuality possess an unrestricted sociosexual orientation. Americans are more typical of an unrestricted sociosexual orientation Schmitt, In America, since the sexual liberation movement in the s, discussions of sexuality are acceptable or even frequent in daily conversations and in the media.

We can call this kind of society a sexually liberal society. Schmitt found Americans receive higher sociosexuality scores than do the Chinese from Hong Kong. Thus it is conceivable to argue that people who live in sexually liberal societies like America may well engage in more sexual self-disclosure than do people who live in sexuality conservative countries.

By comparing studies conducted in America and China, it is clear that 1 Americans have their first sexual experiences much earlier than do the Chinese. Americans often are less restricted than are the Chinese in their sexual relationships. The Chinese possess less permissive views towards dating and sexuality. Chinese couples tend to start dating when they are much older and are less likely to develop sexual relationships with their dates than are their American counterparts.

Thus, Americans appear to be more motivated by a desire to satisfy sexual needs and less worried about commitment issues than are their Chinese peers. On the other hand, the Chinese, who value chastity, appear to be more concerned about relationship maintenance than the pleasure of sex. Similar results were secured by Tang and her colleagues We mention self-disclosure in general only when we are contrasting the two forms of disclosure. This is not surprising. This scale, however, includes only four questions related to sexual self-disclosure.

These questions ask about sexual morality, one's sex life, sexual attraction, and sexual behavior. We would contend that factors such as love, trust, and commitment, as well as the extent of sexual self-disclosure, should be given more attention, when attempting to understand the development of intimate relationships.

Social penetration theory suggests that interactive partners are more likely to communicate and disclose intimate information when an interpersonal relationship is in the process of becoming more intimate. When rewards exceed costs in a relationship, individuals will be motivated to disclose their attitudes, feelings, and behaviors to their partners, and if things go well, a relationship will become more intimate.

When the costs of a relationship exceed the rewards, on the other hand, individuals will cease to disclose and as a consequence the relationship will become less intimate.

It activates the same sensation of pleasure in the brain regions as we get from receiving money, eating food, or having sex. Thus, under the right conditions, people should be willing to self-disclose and develop intimate relationships. It seems logical to suggest that sexual self-disclosure might also be a pleasurable experience.

Sexual Self-Disclosure [ TOP ] As we observed earlier, researchers differ in their definitions of sexual self-disclosure. It is an especially intimate form of communication. Research conducted on sexual self-disclosure found its antecedents and consequences are not always identical with those of self-disclosure in general. For example, Wheeless and colleagues found that different stages of development of intimate relationships among college students could be discriminated by general communication satisfaction and sexual communication satisfaction, with general communication satisfaction being a weaker index of intimacy than is sexual communication satisfaction.

Communication researchers considered communication satisfaction to be an important index of willingness to communicate.

Such research suggests that the function of sexual self-disclosure and general self-disclosure might not completely overlap in the development of intimacy. Culture and Self-Disclosure [ TOP ] Cultures differ in the extent to which various topics are considered appropriate for conversation. In the West, people generally engage in more intimate self-disclosure than do non-Westerners.

Chen found that Americans consistently show a higher level of self-disclosure on topics of opinions, interests, work, financial issues, personality, and body image than do the Chinese. Americans self-disclose more than do the Chinese or Japanese with target persons such as parents, intimate friends, acquaintances, and strangers Schug et al.

Cultural norms also shape how comfortable men and women are in disclosing. According to Nakanishithe Japanese prefer a lower level of self-disclosure to strangers than do Americans. Japanese women prefer a lower level of personal conversations than do Japanese men. This is opposite the sex differences in self-disclosure typically found in America where women prefer more disclosure than do men.

Asian Americans are more hesitant to express themselves verbally and display more self-restraint in interactions than do their non-Asian peers Ogawa, Differences in self-disclosure are also found within Western cultures. For example, Americans disclose more than do Germans Lewin, Given the fact that culture has been found to have a significant impact on self-disclosure, it seems logical to argue that culture may well impact sexual self-disclosure.

The sexual self-disclosure and sexual communication literature have been examined by different types of scholars: Masters and colleagues, as well as more contemporary researchers e. It has also been documented that good communication is an indispensable component in marital adjustment and satisfaction e.

If people follow appropriate sexual scripts, they are able to decide what is or is not appropriate in a sexual relationship. Yet not all studies support that contention. Byers and Demmonsfor example, found that sexual self-disclosure did not make a unique contribution to dating couples' sexual satisfaction. MacNeil and Byers speculate that perhaps sexual communication or sexual self-disclosure must take place in a long-term committed relationship, if it is to make a unique contribution to sexual satisfaction.

Factors Related to Sexual Self-Disclosure: Byers and Demmons found that people who are in a long-term relationship, have had more sex partners, are in monogamous dating relationships, show affection more frequently, and are more satisfied with their relationships, engaged in more sexual self-disclosure.

Byers and Demmons speculate that people in highly and reciprocally disclosing relationships tend to disclose more about themselves sexually. Byers and Demmons found that women disclosure more than do men both sexually and non-sexually. However, sexuality is a highly personal and private topic for self-disclosure. Women may be less comfortable than are men in discussing sex, especially their own sexual satisfaction, because the double standard of sex roles inhibit them from admitting to being knowledgeable about sex Huong, Especially in many Asian cultures, women are expected to be passive in sexual matters.

Chiou and Wan found that Taiwanese female adolescents sexually self-disclosed less often and less fully than did males both online and in daily life. On one hand, women generally disclose more than do men. However, it is not certain that this difference holds true in the case of sexual self-disclosure.

The double standard means it is more acceptable for men to talk about and engage in sexual activities. Women tend to deny sexual experience.

Thus, in this area, unlike others, we might expect women to engage in less sexual self-disclosure. Surprising, they only found small correlations between the two constructs.

In accord with their speculations and in spite of their resultsit does seem reasonable to speculate that the longer people are in relationship, the more opportunity they would have to disclose themselves sexually to their intimate partners. As to power in the relationship, Rubin et al. Nonetheless, it is reasonable to speculate that the powerful might feel more confident about expressing themselves, and thus to get the things they desire in intimate relationships.

Only subsequent research can show whether or not this is so. Most other studies of sexual communication only examined the correlation between sexual communication and sexual satisfaction e. However, Byers and Demmons found that people who self-disclose more sexually of their sexual likes and dislikes tend to have a more positive appraisal of their sexual communication.

culture and self disclosure relationship

Also, they found that sexual self-disclosure has a unique association with sexual satisfaction when nonsexual communication is controlled. However, according to their findings, sexual self-disclosure does not correlate with relationship satisfaction or sexual satisfaction when general self-disclosure is controlled.

This indicates sexual self-disclosure may not make the unique contribution to relationship satisfaction or to sexual satisfaction that theorists have proposed. They speculate that daters may expect more sexual disclosure as they value being open with their partners.

But they expect partial disclosure instead of full disclosure to be most effective since there are negative consequences of too much disclosure Hatfield, Thus, couples should be more satisfied with partial disclosure. Communication researchers also find sexual communication is correlated with sexual satisfaction. Cupach and Comstock found that satisfaction with sexual communication, sexual satisfaction, and relationship satisfaction are all positively correlated.

In Cupach and Comstock's study, the authors assessed the relationship between sexual communication satisfaction and sexual satisfaction, but did not assess the relationship between sexual communication and sexual satisfaction directly. So far, nearly all of these studies have been correlational. Thus experimental research demonstrating a casual relationship between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction is needed. People may well refrain from self-disclosure because of the negative consequences that self-disclosure or intimacy may bring.

Hatfield listed several reasons why people fear intimacy. Given these fears, it is easy to imagine why people may not want to disclose their innermost secrets Paul et. For a more recent discussion of some of the problems men and women anticipate and experience when they discuss their sex lives with intimates see Faulkner and Lannutti