Self-disclosure

from Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

With a self-revelation a caller tells a person verbally personal information which was previously unknown that (also self-disclosure, self-revelation, self-introduction self-disclosure). It reveals thoughts, feelings, experiences or parts of identity. She usually expects an accepting or supportive response. The interlocutor can encourage self-disclosure through questions or comments. On the other hand, there is a risk that he will ward off a disclosure or take a negative view of it. Through (mutual) self-disclosure, emotional closeness and trust usually develop in a relationship. Both the image of the revealing person in conversation partners (external image, public self) and their self-image (self-concept, private self) are influenced by self-disclosure. In different contexts, self-disclosure has different goals or functions. Social media offer new ways of self-disclosure .

Interactive model of self-disclosure

" Self-disclosure is the purposeful, predominantly verbal communication of personal and confidential thoughts and feelings". Subject areas of self-disclosure in everyday life are u. a .: Attitudes and opinions, preferences and interests, education and work, money, your own personality , physical experience . Self-disclosure is an interpersonal process that can be expected to produce a positive result if:

  1. One person (potential speaker) has had a positive or negative experience, is busy with a problem, or has a concern with another person.
  2. She would like to reveal herself to a conversation partner, and she expects a positive answer.
  3. She reveals herself to a person she has chosen (interlocutor, listener, target person, recipient, addressee, audience) with whom she has positive relationship experiences. Possibly. she initially made hints and "tested" the receptivity of the target person.
  4. The interviewee who is confronted with the disclosure can encourage self-disclosure through (direct or indirect) questions or encouragement. She responds supportively.
  5. As a direct consequence, the speaker feels accepted and validated. If she receives social support and can cope with her problem situation, the revelation will have a positive outcome in the long run.
  6. The interlocutor often answers with his own self-disclosure (reciprocity) and feels strengthened in the relationship with the speaker. A disclosure can have long-term consequences for him too, e.g. B. when the relationship develops positively or when a secret is entrusted to him.

The meaning and implications of a revelation are largely determined by the response of the listener or negotiated between the speaker and the listener. - With every self-disclosure there is a risk that the conversation partner will react with rejection or devaluation or that the relationship will deteriorate.

In public space, described by the sociologist Erving Goffman with the metaphor “front stage”, the interactions of those involved are primarily determined by the roles they have taken on ; here self-disclosures are subject to strict norms and are limited. The “backstage” belongs to the private or intimate sphere , in which roles and norms are clearly less strictly defined (spouse, friend, work colleague, sports colleague); communications are freer and self-disclosure is the norm.

In every interaction is also self-presentation (presentation of self, self-presentation; impression management ) instead. This includes verbal utterances and non-verbal announcements of a person ( gestures , status symbols , uniform, etc.), with which they create a certain impression in the interaction partners and announce their situation and role definition. Self-portrayal and self-disclosure pursue two overarching goals: "Assertive self-portrayal aims to obtain advantages or support from other people." In "defensive self-portrayal", a person is about conveying an image of himself to other people and protecting that agrees with one's own ideal self. Self-disclosure and self-expression overlap.

According to the four-sided model of communication ( F. Schulz von Thun ), four aspects are given in every communication: content, aspect of self-disclosure, appeal, relationship. The self-disclosure aspect encompasses everything that a person reveals in addition to the verbally expressed content in an interaction, e.g. B. the affect it connects with the thing. Self-disclosure is therefore a verbal communication, the content of which is related to oneself. Verbal self-disclosure and its self-disclosure aspect usually coincide. However, (unintentional) discrepancies are not uncommon.

Functions of self-revelations

Depending on the situation and context of the interaction, a person has specific intentions with regard to the effects on the addressee and the repercussions on himself when he reveals himself.

(1) Self-disclosure in lasting personal relationships. At the beginning and during the course of personal relationships, especially in private, the people involved constantly exchange self-revelations. It created trust and emotional closeness, the common by management tasks and activities, and be maintained by continuous self-revelations. - A significant sub-form of self-disclosure are messages about positive personal events (capitalization).

(2) Self-disclosure for self-validation. Everyone has the need to speak of his / her actions, experiences, thoughts, feelings and plans; he / she addresses his / her self. If the interaction partner gives a confirmatory or respectful reaction, the person achieves clarification, naming and evaluation of their experiences. She validates her self-image and consolidates herself emotionally. In the case of depressing emotional states such as disappointment, fear or anger, a person can acquit himself and react ( catharsis ) through self-disclosure .

(3) Self-disclosure to build and consolidate the public image. Every person has ideas of what image other people have or should have of them ( external image , public self). She selectively reveals personal information in order to create the desired impression in relation to a specific audience (in the workplace, in the relatives, in the community). She cares about reputation and tries to avoid what could lead to a negative image. The person generally expects to be treated according to this public image.

(4) Self-disclosure of one's own role. If two people are unknown or meet in a new situation, both give a (short) self-presentation in order to achieve a common definition of the situation and tasks, e.g. B. Doctor - patient, salesperson - customer, lecturer - course participant. They present their own role verbally and non-verbally and express their expectations of the interaction partner (s).

(5) Self-disclosure of parts of the identity. By revealing a previously unknown part of their identity ( stigma ), a person can significantly change the image that interaction partners and caregivers have of them. B. A passed exam with top marks, a serious traffic accident, "inappropriate" origin. The concealment of this part of the identity was often associated with restrictions. The goal of the revelation is that the person can bring the stigmatized trait into the relationship and that the relationship with the target person becomes deeper.

(6) Self-disclosure of an emergency. A person can only receive cooperation or support if they reveal their situation or plight and asks the target person for help (appeal). A person can only get medical treatment if, as a patient, he or she reveals their complaints.

(7) Recipient-related self-disclosure. A person passes on their experience and personal experience to a specific target person in order to help them with a task or a decision. As feedback , it reveals how the target person's behavior affects them (sincerity). It is crucial that the speaker respects the target person's public image and their freedom of choice.

(8) Medial self-disclosure. Many people address and reveal themselves in interviews, in an autobiography , in memoirs , on talk shows or on digital social media . There you construct a public image of yourself. The addressees (readers, viewers, users) are not personally known to the speaker, writer or broadcaster and are not present. An interest in the station and its self-revelations is assumed from them. The psychiatrist and psychotherapist Jürg Willi describes in detail his “personal [life] experiences as motivation for this book” at the beginning of his specialist book “Turning Points in the Course of Life”; for him it was "living conditions and love or work relationships" that enabled him to "live an extremely happy and productive life into old age". Interviews and documentations with contemporary witnesses and with people with disadvantages or disabilities contain self-revelations and testimonies. Those affected want to draw attention to their experiences and living environments from a larger audience and from those who are equally affected. Iris Galey (2015) reveals her story as an incest survivor. In social networks (Facebook and others) it is a common goal of the revealing person to attract the attention of a large number of target persons: "How can I present myself in such a way that they take notice of me?"

Behavior of the speaker

Self-revelations to close people, which were reported by young adults, related to a large extent to "taste preferences and interests", "work or training" and "attitudes and opinions", to a lesser extent to "personality", "money" and " Body experience ”. In addition to personal financial circumstances, lies and feelings such as envy, shame or jealousy are rarely revealed. People differ from one individual to another in their tendency to reveal how often and how flexibly they reveal personal information. People with a high "vulnerability tolerance" show more self-disclosure. You have the resources to cope with any negative consequences of your exposure. People with low “vulnerability tolerance” show little self-disclosure; they avoid the risk of a negative reaction, but neither do they get the benefit of self-disclosure, e.g. B. they have fewer friends. Shyness leads to lower levels of self-disclosure. Lonely people judge their interaction skills negatively; they avoid revealing anything personal about themselves to others.

Self-disclosure also depends on the type of attachment (secure; insecure avoiding; insecure ambivalent). Safe and ambivalent people show a higher degree of self-disclosure; they like an interaction partner with high self-disclosure. People with an avoidant attachment style, on the other hand, refrain from self-disclosure and do not want this from the interlocutor.

A speaker "designs [through his self-portrayal] a definition of his situation" and he makes a kind of "moral demand" to be treated by interaction partners "as people of his kind might expect". He himself has the "obligation" to behave accordingly.

Behavior of the listener

Self-disclosure usually also leads to self-disclosure for the listener. This so-called reciprocity effect has been empirically proven many times over. A conversation partner facilitates revelation for the speaker (e.g. doctor, lawyer) through previous discretion and the assurance of confidentiality. Superficial, non-intimate self-revelations are more likely to lead to reciprocity and are more likely to be reciprocated than deep and intimate revelations. Addressees of moderate self-disclosure like the speaker (liking); with very little or very pronounced self-disclosure, they like him significantly less (inverted U-shaped relationship).

Interaction partners usually notice when self-revelation or behavior contradicts the previous public image of a speaker (see above "Self-disclosure aspect"). For example, a department head is late for a meeting in the morning; she reveals that she had to organize care for her sick preschooler. The partner in such a situation can address the problem, accept it, play it down, ignore it in silence or reject the speaker.

Disadvantages and advantages of self-disclosure

Self-disclosure may not be appropriate for a given situation; it can contradict manners , norms or the expectations of an interaction partner; it can expose privacy or induce shame ; it can lead to disadvantages for the speaker and / or the listener. To avoid negative effects, people do not talk about many personal matters (see also Privacy paradox ).

The following disadvantages for a speaker can arise: the listener is disinterested in the information; he criticizes, withdraws resources or punishes. The relationship breaks off. The speaker's reputation and reputation deteriorate. In the case of rejecting or devaluing reactions, negative elements can develop in the speaker's self-concept . Possible disadvantages for the target person are: A revealed content is uncomfortable, stressful or overwhelming for them (e.g. trauma, emergency, invisible handicap). She feels obliged to help. She feels attacked, devalued or insecure. Possible disadvantages for the interaction: An interaction may be impaired by personal content that is outside the roles, e.g. For example, if a person speaks too much about their child's problems in the workplace.

The later author S. Kahawatte (film My Blind Date with Life ) graduated from high school with a concealed severe visual impairment, trained as a hotel manager and made a career. When he then applied revealing his disability, he could not find a suitable employer. He had decided to give up secrecy because it had become unbearable for him and built his own company.

It is uncertain whether the feared disadvantage of self-disclosure will actually occur. Both the disclosure and the concealment of a critical personal issue can have positive and / or negative effects. It is crucial to find an “appropriate” addressee and to address him in a suitable situation. When a conflict becomes manifest through self-disclosure, the point is to overcome it and counter inappropriate criticism. Ignatius & Kokkonen come to the conclusion in their review article: "Secrecy is predominantly harmful to us."

Self-disclosure in different contexts

Self-disclosure in close relationships

Mutual self-revelations play a crucial role in the beginning and establishment of a love relationship. a. about origin, attitudes and wishes for the relationship. In the course of the partnership it is about life tasks, goals and plans and their realization. This requires constant mutual self-disclosure. In the everyday life of a relationship, the exchange of positive personal events takes up a lot of space (capitalization). "Communicating positive experiences not only increases the positive affect associated with the positive event, but also strengthens the relationship with the interaction partner."

Self-disclosure can be viewed as an interpersonal strategy for controlling emotions in couples. In a diary study, participants in a multi-year relationship reported a higher “positive affect” in the evening when they had told their partner about their “most positive event” of the day and / or when they were told by their partner "Most positive event" had been told. The more people who have been married for a long time revealed themselves to their spouses about personal issues such as “existential issues”, “partnership-based familiarity” and “values”, the higher their “marital satisfaction”. In contrast, revelations and conversations about marital problems (“marriage work”) had partially unfavorable effects on “marital satisfaction” among couples who had been married for decades.

Some personal information is also withheld in a close relationship. “Even in a well-managed marriage, we expect the partners to keep secrets from each other, about financial issues, past experiences, current affairs.” In close relationships, topics are avoided by mutual agreement, e.g. B. if a partner is overwhelmed or if convictions are incompatible. People in close relationships strongly expect their partners to be honest and not deceive them; that they reveal the facts that are relevant to the relationship.

In contrast to Goffman, the sociologist Günter Burkart observes : Partnership relationships used to be anchored in a “ritualized world”; they have “released themselves from it and opened up to reflective problematization. Claims of authenticity and sincerity, which have now been established as central norms for couple relationships in a short period of time, require a high degree of self-thematization competence ”. "The partnership discourse demands [...] a number of characteristics such as authenticity, honesty, openness, willingness to talk". The demands to reveal oneself to the partner have increased significantly.

Self-disclosure in case of emergency and need of help

Individuals reveal an emergency in order to express themselves (validation) and to receive social support , e.g. B. in the event of job loss, separation / divorce, serious illness of one's own or of relatives, bereavement. People in distress are often ashamed. When it becomes known, the public image (external image) of those affected changes. They are often considered by the public to be dependent, incompetent or responsible. They often refrain from disclosing or filing an application in order to avoid disclosure. For example, a person who has lost their job continues to leave their home in the morning wearing work-related clothing and only return in the evening. A person is more likely to accept help when they can save face: when they can claim help; if she can attribute her plight to external factors or if she expects to be able to return help ( reciprocity norm). When a person asks for and receives help, they can overcome their need for help, which in turn improves their public image.

After a death, bereaved relatives feel the need to reveal themselves for a long time, to talk about the deceased and the circumstances of dying. V. Kast speaks of the "phase of emerging emotions". Here self-revelation only works in repeated repetition. It can be difficult to find listeners. In a mourning self-help group or in a mourning café, mourners can reveal themselves and express themselves to those who are equally affected.

Self-disclosure of stigmata

Stigma is a usually invisible personal characteristic or a part of identity that is assessed negatively in a defined public or group , e.g. B. Victim of violence, sexual orientation, previous prison sentence. A disclosure influences the public image of the person concerned, changes the definition of the situation in the case of interaction partners and can lead to discrimination , disadvantage or loss of contact. A stigmatized trait can trigger severe shame . Affected persons are "discreditable". They often try to keep their stigma a secret. You constantly control yourself in interactions so as not to inadvertently utter something revealing. You experience that uninformed interlocutors speak derogatory about people with the same characteristic (e.g. pregnancy). Often times, they feel guilty about hiding. In close relationships, self-disclosure is indispensable, because only "when data of the real self become known to others will a person see acceptance by a recipient as a valid response to their real self".

A person may have admitted or not corrected an incorrect picture of himself and was then accepted by an audience. If it then reveals the correct information, it faces two risks of rejection: on the one hand because of the information revealed, on the other hand because of the concealment that is then revealed. The writer Günter Grass was drafted into the Waffen SS in 1944 at the age of 17 . He revealed this to the public at the age of 78 in The Skinning of the Onion (2006). He received "numerous, both critical and mild comments".

Affected parties use various "information control techniques", e.g. B. reveal themselves only to a few reliable or equally affected persons; "To deceive"; to reveal oneself voluntarily. Furthermore, "concealing", "signaling" and "revealing" are described. The main reasons for revealing a previously unknown stigma; H. against secrecy are: giving up dishonesty in close relationships and being able to contribute without restriction; end information control efforts; exclude the risk of exposure (disclosure by third parties).

Women who had suffered one or more sexual assaults and had revealed these events to at least one person were interviewed. All participants had experienced “positive reactions” from their interlocutors, all but two also “negative reactions”. The women who had processed the sexual attacks to such an extent that they no longer suffered from feelings of shame did not show themselves to be burdened by negative reactions to their self-disclosure.

It is helpful for survivors of trauma if they are given adequate exposure (self-disclosure) of the traumatic experiences and if they are recognized and valued by caregivers and in the public, i.e. H. if your public image as a trauma survivor is positively assigned. Persistent negative reactions from caregivers to the revelation of trauma (e.g. exclusion or accusation) often lead to the development of post-traumatic stress disorder PTSD . In some of the people who had developed PTSD as victims of crimes, dysfunctional tendencies towards disclosure were observed: "Resistance to tell", "urge to talk" and "emotional reactions during disclosure" ". The first two variables are statistically independent of each other. In the participants with dysfunctional revelation tendencies, the regression of the PTSD symptoms was considerably delayed. Three months after the accident (predominantly a traffic accident or fall), patients with severe brain injury showed a stronger expression of PTSD symptoms if they had a tendency towards “dysfunctional revelations” (see above). The symptoms were also significantly more pronounced when the next caregiver showed dysfunctional revelation tendencies. Interventions to overcome dysfunctional exposure may improve the progression of the disease after trauma.

Pregnancy is an integral part of a woman's identity and a possible stigma that may not initially be visible. Pregnant women in an employment relationship decide whether, when and how they reveal themselves in the workplace. Of a sample of working women whose pregnancy was still unknown at work, 64% experienced one or more “short-term discrimination” there. As the pregnancy became more “visible”, “concealing” expressions decreased and “revealing” expressions increased.

People with a homosexual orientation have to decide whether and how they will reveal this to relatives, friends, at work (external coming-out, also going public; see coming-out ). A lawyer who lived in a lesbian relationship revealed herself about it in the law firm six months after starting the job and was fully accepted in her identity. Her manager said: "Secrecy is a form of dishonesty."

Self-disclosure on social media

Many people reveal themselves with verbal posts and photos on social media - on Facebook , Twitter , Instagram , WhatsApp , YouTube , in blogs and the like. a. You can be personally identified as a user. In psychological studies, self-revelations in face-to-face conversations and in computer-mediated communication were compared.

Self- disclosure is an integral part of Facebook profiles, status updates and comments. According to a survey, users follow several motives for their activities on Facebook: (a) "Desiring new relationships", (b) "Compensating for loneliness", (c) "Getting attention", (d) "Maintaining existing relationships" and ( e) "Pastime". These motives as well as their “self-esteem” influence the self-revelations of the users with regard to the characteristics “honesty / correctness”, “intentionality” and (positive) “value”.

Users were asked about their communications with friends. They indicated a higher degree of “depth” and “breadth” of self-disclosure for face-to-face conversations than for computer-mediated exchanges. In young adults, self-disclosure in personal contact has more “scope”, more “breadth” and more “depth”, but less positive “value” than self-disclosure via the mobile messaging service. Serious and difficult topics are more likely to be revealed in face-to-face contact.

In a representative sample of the German population, the “willingness to self-reveal” was highest for offline individual discussions, and significantly lower for offline group discussions and online exchange. The extent of “emotional support” was rated highest in face-to-face conversations, lowest for communication on social networks and, in between, for communication via instant messengers.

Young adults who were receiving psychotherapy and who had a Facebook profile stated in a survey that they revealed more personal content in psychotherapy than on Facebook. The more personal things they revealed in a therapy session, the greater their sense of "relief". "The results suggest that any concerns that psychotherapy clients are using Facebook as a substitute for psychotherapy revelations are unlikely to be warranted."

When communicating on social media, e.g. B. through a profile on Facebook, the recipients cannot be selected and are not personally present, i. H. the message cannot be targeted to specific addressees. To protect privacy, it is recommended to set up a “friend list” or to join a “group”.

Interventions to promote self-disclosure

  1. Psychotherapy and medical treatment are conceived as interactions in which a client or patient can and should unrestrictedly reveal themselves about their suffering and experience. In client-centered psychotherapy according to Carl Rogers , the client is primarily supported in his or her self-exploration .
  2. Expressive writing according to J. Pennebaker (expressive writing, also experimental disclosure) describes a method of written self-disclosure. Participants with health problems or a history of trauma improve their mental and physical health, as well as general functioning.
  3. In the “dialogue” ( ML Moeller ) couples reveal themselves through the “exchange of self-portraits. […] In a conversation I show the other how I am currently experiencing myself. I stay with myself with my focus - and thus also in the relationship. "
  4. I-messages. According to the "defeatless" method of conflict resolution ( T. Gordon , see Gordon model ), the person who "has" a problem should reveal it in an " I-message ".
  5. The topic-centered interaction TZI ( Ruth Cohn ) is a method for cooperation in working groups of various kinds. The participants' self-disclosure is given space in accordance with the postulate “Disturbances have priority”.
  6. The telephone counseling is a conversation offer for people in crisis and emergency situations with the principle "offer: speaking helps clarify", in which advice seekers and telephone counselors remain anonymous.
  7. In support groups people come together who all have the same kind of problem or illness. They want to speak out and reveal themselves about their complaints and coping efforts (e.g. Emotions Anonymous ).
  8. Internet psychotherapy as well as counseling and self-help offers on the Internet offer a wide range of opportunities for self-disclosure (see e-mental health ).
  9. Truth and Reconciliation Commission in South Africa. The perpetrators whocommitted crimes and political violence against colored peopleduring apartheid in South Africa should expose these acts; they were promised impunity. Steps towards reconciliation were expected from the unreserved public revelations.

See also

literature

  • VJ Derlega, S. Metts, S. Petronio & ST Margulis 1993. Self-disclosure. Sage Publications, Newbury Park.
  • E. Goffman 2003. We all play theater. The self-expression in everyday life. 7th edition Piper, Munich.
  • E. Ignatius & M. Kokkonen 2007. Factors contributing to verbal self-disclosure. Nordic Psychology 59, 362-391.

Individual evidence

  1. ↑ a b c B.A. Farber & AE Sohn 2007. Patterns of self-disclosure in psychotherapy and marriage. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training 44, 226-231.
  2. ↑ a b S.M. Jourard & P. ​​Lasakow 1958. Some factors in self-disclosure. The Journal of Abnormal and Social Psychology 56, 91-98.
  3. ↑ a b S.R. Chaudoir & JD Fisher 2010. The disclosure process model: Understanding disclosure decision making and postdisclosure outcomes among people living with a concealable stigmatized identity. Psychological Bulletin 136, 236-256.
  4. ↑ a b c d T. Holtgraves 1990. The language of self-disclosure. In: H. Giles & WP Robinson (Eds.): Handbook of language and social psychology. Wiley, New York, 191-207.
  5. ↑ VJ Derlega, S. Metts, S. Petronio & Margulis ST 1993. Self-disclosure. Sage Publications, Newbury Park, Jan.
  6. ^ E. Goffman 2003. We all play theater. The self-expression in everyday life. 7th edition Piper, Munich, 100 ff.
  7. ↑ a b H.D. Mummendey 2006. Self-expression. In: HW Bierhoff & D. Frey (Ed.): Handbook of social psychology and communication psychology. Hogrefe, Göttingen, 49-56.
  8. ↑ a b c d R.F. Baumeister 1982. A self-presentational view of social phenomena. Psychological Bulletin 91, 3-26.
  9. ↑ F. Schulz von Thun 2011. Talking to one another: 1. Disturbances and clarifications. General psychology of communication. 49th edition Rowohlt, Reinbek, 27 ff.
  10. ↑ VJ Derlega u. a. 1993. Self-disclosure , p. 15 ff.
  11. ↑ a b c d e f E. Ignatius & M. Kokkonen 2007. Factors contributing to verbal self-disclosure. Nordic Psychology 59, 362-391.
  12. ↑ CR Agnew & LE Vander Drift 2015. Relationship maintenance and dissolution. In: M. Mikulincer & PR Shaver (Eds.): APA Handbook of personality and social psychology , Vol. 3. Interpersonal relations. APA, Washington DC, 581-604.
  13. ↑ SL Gable, HT Reis et al. a. 2004. What do you do when things go right? The intrapersonal and interpersonal benefits of sharing positive events. J Personality Social Psychology 87: 228-245.
  14. ↑ Derlega et al. a. 1993. Self-disclosure , 3, 37.
  15. ↑ a b S.A. Culbert 1973. The interpersonal process of self-disclosure: It takes two to see one. In: RT Golembiewski & A. Blumberg (eds.): Sensitivity training and the laboratory approach. Readings about concepts and applications. Peacock, Itasca / Illinois, 110-116.
  16. ^ E. Goffman 2003. We all play theater , 12 ff.
  17. ^ E. Goffman 2010. Stigma. About techniques of coping with damaged identity. Suhrkamp, ​​Berlin, 18.
  18. ↑ a b J.P. Dillard & LK Knobloch 2011. Interpersonal influence. In: ML Knapp & JA Daly (eds.): The Sage handbook of interpersonal communication. 4th ed. Sage Publications, Los Angeles, 389-422.
  19. ↑ J. Willi 2013. Turning points in the life course. Personal development under changed circumstances - the ecological view of psychotherapy. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart, 7 ff.
  20. ^ I. Galey 2015. I didn't cry when Dad died and I hated sex until I found love. Story of an incest and a healing. Münchner Verlagsgruppe, Munich.
  21. ↑ M. Schroer 2006. Self-thematicization. From the (discovery) of the self and the search for attention. In: G. Burkart (ed.): The expansion of the confessional culture - new forms of self-thematization. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, 41–72; 57.
  22. ↑ a b c N.C. Krämer & N. Haferkamp 2011. Online self-presentation: Balancing privacy concerns and impression construction on social networking sites. In: S. Trepte & L. Reinecke (Eds.): Privacy online: Perspectives on privacy and self-disclosure in the social web. Springer, Heidelberg, 127-141.
  23. ↑ VJ Derlega et al. 1993. Self-disclosure , 68 ff.
  24. ↑ VJ Derlega u. a. 1993. Self-disclosure , 70 ff.
  25. ↑ M. Mikulincer & O. Nachshon 1991. Attachment styles and patterns of self-disclosure. J Personality Social Psychology 61, 321-331.
  26. ^ E. Goffman 2003. We all play theater , 14 ff.
  27. ↑ VJ Derlega u. a. 1993. Self-disclosure , 33 ff.
  28. ^ NL Collins & LC Miller LC 1994. Self-disclosure and liking: A metaanalytic review. Psychological Bulletin 116, 457-475.
  29. ^ E. Goffman 2003. We all play theater , 16 f.
  30. ^ E. Goffman 2003. We All Play Theater , 13.
  31. ↑ S. Kahawatte 2017. My blind date with life - As a blind man among the sighted. A true story. Bastei Lübbe, Bergisch Gladbach.
  32. ↑ VJ Derlega u. a. 1993. Self-disclosure , 85 f.
  33. ^ E. Ignatius & M. Kokkonen 2007. Factors contributing to verbal self-disclosure , 381
  34. ↑ S. spokesman u. a. 2015. Relationship initiation and development. In: M. Mikulincer & PR Shaver (Eds.): APA Handbook of personality and social psychology, Vol. 3. Interpersonal relations. APA, Washington DC, 211-245.
  35. ↑ J. Greenberg et al. a. 2015. Social psychology. The science of everyday life. Chap. 15 Close relationships. Worth Publishers, New York, 571 f.
  36. ↑ S. Utz 2015. The function of self-disclosure on social network sites: Not only intimate, but also positive and entertaining self-disclosures increase the feeling of connection. Computers in Human Behavior 45, 1-10.
  37. ↑ AM Hicks & LM Diamond 2008. How was your day? Couples' affect when telling and hearing daily events. Personal Relationships 15, 205-228.
  38. ↑ JF Jensen & AJ Rauer 2015. Marriage work in older couples: Disclosure of marital problems to spouses and friends over time. J Family Psychology 29, 732-743.
  39. ^ E. Goffman 2003. We all play theater , 60.
  40. ↑ VJ Derlega u. a. 1993. Self-disclosure , 79 f.
  41. ^ E. Goffman 2003. We all play theater.
  42. ↑ G. Burkart 2006. Self-reflection and confessional culture. In: ders. (Ed.): The expansion of the confessional culture - new forms of self-thematization. Verlag für Sozialwissenschaften, Wiesbaden, 7–40.
  43. ↑ G. Burkart 2006. Self-reflection and confessional culture, 23, 27
  44. ^ N. Knoll & R. Schwarzer 2005. Social support. In: R. Schwarzer (Ed.): Health Psychology. Encyclopedia of Psychology, Series X, Volume 1. Hogrefe, Göttingen, 333–349.
  45. ^ V. Kast 2015. Mourning. Phases and chances of the psychological process. 38th expanded edition Kreuz Verlag, Freiburg, 71 ff.
  46. ^ E. Goffman 2010. Stigma , 12 ff
  47. ↑ a b c K.P. Jones 2017. To tell or not to tell? Examining the role of discrimination in the pregnancy disclosure process at work. Journal of Occupational Health Psychology 22, 239-250.
  48. ↑ G. Grass 2006. When peeling the onion. Steidl Verlag, Göttingen.
  49. ^ E. Goffman 2010. Stigma , 116 ff.
  50. ↑ CR Decou, ​​TT Cole et al. a. 2017. Assault-related shame mediates the association between negative social reactions to disclosure of sexual assault and psychological distress. Psychological Trauma: Theory, Research, Practice and Policy 9, 166-172.
  51. ^ A. Maercker , E. Heim, T. Hecker & MV Thoma 2017. Social support after trauma. The neurologist 88, 18-25.
  52. ^ A. Maercker & AB Horn 2013. A socio-interpersonal perspective on PTSD: The case of environments and interpersonal processes. Clinical Psychology and Psychotherapy 20, 465-481.
  53. ↑ J. Mueller, H. & A. Mörgeli Maercker 2008. Disclosure and social acknowledegement as predictors of recovery from post-traumatic stress: A longitudinal study in crime victims. The Canadian J of Psychiatry 53, 160-168.
  54. ↑ L. Pielmaier & A. Maercker 2011. Psychological adaptation to life-threatening injury in dyads: The role of dysfunctional disclosure of trauma. European J Psychothraumatology 2, 8749.
  55. ↑ K. Kavanagh 1995. Don't ask, don't tell: Deception required, disclosure denied. Psychology, Public Policy, Law 1, 142-160.
  56. ^ EE Hollenbaugh & AL Ferris 2015. Predictors of honesty, intent and valence of Facebook self-disclosure. Computers in Human Behavior 50, 456-464.
  57. ↑ EK Ruppel, C. Gross a. a. 2017. Reflecting on connecting: Meta-analysis of differences between computer-mediated and face-to-face self-disclosure. J Computer-Mediated Communication 22, 18-34.
  58. ↑ K. Knop, JS Öncü u. a. 2016. Offline time is quality time. Comparing within-group self-disclosure in mobile messaging applications and face-to-face interactions. Computers in Human Behavior, 55, 1076-1084.
  59. ↑ S. Trepte , PK Masur u. a. 2015. Privacy needs of different types of communication online and offline. Media Perspektiven 5/2015, 250–257.
  60. ↑ BA Farber & GC Nitzburg 2016. Young adult self-disclosures in psychotherapy and on Facebook. Counseling Psychology Quarterly 29, 76-89.
  61. ↑ JW Pennebaker (ed.) 1997. Emotion, disclosure and health. APA, Washington DC.
  62. ↑ AB Horn, MR Mehl & F. Grosse Deters 2015. Expressive writing and immune activity - health-promoting aspects of self-opening. In: C. Schubert (Ed.): Psychoneuroimmunology and Psychotherapy. 2nd edition. Schattauer, Stuttgart, 245-264.
  63. ↑ ML Moeller 2017. The truth begins with two people. The couple in conversation. 36th edition. Rowohlt, Reinbek, 30 f.
  64. ^ T. Gordon 2012. Family Conference. Resolving conflicts between parents and children. Heyne TB. First edition 1972.
  65. ↑ R. Cohn 2016. On the basis of the topic-centered interactive system: axioms, postulates, auxiliary rules. In this. From psychoanalysis to topic-centered interaction. 15th edition. Klett-Cotta, Stuttgart, 120–128. 1st edition 1975.
  66. ↑ FJ Hücker 2011. “One can share worries”. The concept of telephone counseling. Social Extra 35 (3/4), 10–15.