73. What is self-disclosure of personality in communication and
what functions does it perform?
The concept of self-disclosure first appeared in the work of the American psychologist S. Jurard in 1958, and it was defined by him as “a message to others personal information About Me". He also developed the first technique for diagnosing individual differences in the desire of people to tell others about themselves. Along with the concept of self-disclosure, there is the concept of self-presentation, or self-presentation, by which Jurarda understood "an act of self-expression and behavior aimed at creating a favorable impression or an impression that corresponds to someone's ideals." It is to some extent the opposite of self-disclosure, since it serves to present embellished information about oneself. His research over the next 30 years showed that the desire for self-disclosure depends on many objective and subjective factors. Thus, women tend to self-disclosure more than men, extroverts than introverts. There is evidence of a connection between cognitive style (see questions 69, 70) and self-disclosure in interpersonal communication; in particular, American psychologists have found that field-dependent subjects more often and more willingly tell others about themselves than field-independent ones. As a “target” of self-disclosure, as a rule, people are chosen with whom this person has the most trusting relationship. Among them are often named mother, closest friends of the same and opposite sex, wife or husband, father, counseling psychologist. There are topics that are discussed with a wide range of people and quite frankly: opinions and interests, information about their work or study. Least of all, people tend to discuss their financial situation, health and personal characteristics.
The question of whether it is necessary to tell anything about yourself to others at all was studied in detail by American psychologists, who revealed the positive and negative consequences of self-disclosure. The first positive consequence of self-disclosure is its beneficial effect on the mental health of the communicator's personality. Each person needs to discuss with other people (at least with one person) their affairs and thoughts. He needs this to confirm their correctness or absurdity. Previously, the main function of relieving guilt for one's Sins was performed by the church, now this function is partly taken over by psychotherapists and counseling psychologists in those countries where there is a developed network of counseling services. If these services are not available to a person, then he discusses his problems with relatives or friends. If he is deprived of the opportunity to receive support from anyone, then he may develop a mental or even somatic illness. It has been experimentally proven that lonely people are more susceptible to diseases than those who have spiritually close people. However, the relationship between self-disclosure and mental health is not direct, it also depends on the quality of communication: if a person opens up to the first person he meets, this may not bring him relief.
The second positive consequence of self-disclosure is the development of a person's self-consciousness, his self-determination. This is achieved through two mechanisms: 1) thanks to a story about oneself, a person receives an assessment from the listener and new information for himself; 2) trying to convey his thoughts and feelings to another, a person seeks to better formulate them lexically, which contributes to their greater awareness. All psychotherapy, regardless of the theoretical basis, boils down to creating trusting relationship between the client and the therapist, then bring him to a frank account of himself and help him to realize his problems.
The third positive consequence of self-disclosure is the establishment or strengthening of trusting and intimate relationships. It has long been noted that by entrusting another person with our secret, we bring him closer to ourselves. Psychological studies of friendship and love relationships have shown that at the first stages of their development, partners have a rapid exchange of information about each other, as a result of which an idea of spiritual kinship is established (or not).
The fourth positive consequence is due to the fact that through self-disclosure a person gets the opportunity to satisfy a number of important needs: in social comparison, in personal identification, in mutual knowledge, in adaptation to the social environment, etc.
If we analyze what self-disclosure gives to the person who listens to other people's revelations, then it turns out that it is also useful for him. It helps to get to know this person better and use this knowledge in further communication with him; makes it possible for the recipient to feel that he is respected, appreciated, considered worthy of trust. Mutual self-disclosure leads to the rapprochement of people, to the formation of a sense of "we".
But along with the clear benefits of self-disclosure, there are also negative consequences. Just as there is a balance between the need for communication and the need for privacy, there must be a balance between revealed and hidden information about oneself. If it is violated in the direction of excessive self-disclosure, then the personality is damaged. She becomes more vulnerable to criticism, others get more opportunities to control and manipulate her. A person who easily tells intimate things about himself is perceived by others as frivolous, not trustworthy, since he can just as easily tell about other people's secrets. Some secret maintains interest in this person. Women who know how to attract the attention of men for a long time know this well. Ideas about a certain norm of self-disclosure are different in different historical periods and in different countries. As a rule, a person assimilates them unconsciously in the process of socialization. In addition, they change when moving from one age group to another.
LITERATURE
one . Amyaga NB, Self-disclosure and self-presentation of personality in communication // Personality. Communication. group processes. M., 1991. S. 37-74.
2. Zinchenko EV. Self-disclosure of personality as a socio-psychological phenomenon // Psychological Bulletin. Rostov n / a, 1997. Issue. 2. Part 1. S. 404-419.
4. Shkuratova IP. cognitive style and communication. Rostov n / D, 1994. S. 46-55.
XIV. Mutual understanding in communication
What is mutual understanding? What mechanisms of mutual understanding in communication exist? What characteristics of communication determine the characteristics of mutual understanding? What individual and personal characteristics of the participants in communication affect mutual understanding? What methods.of studying mutual understanding exist?
74. What is mutual understanding?
For psychology, the significance of studying the features of mutual understanding is determined by the fact that it is directly related to communication, understanding, and relationships between people. Mutual understanding is a cementing factor in any joint activity, family and social relations. But just as in everyday practice we often draw Me's attention to the presence of mutual understanding, but to its absence, so for a long time psychology was interested not in mutual understanding as a kind of positive process, but in conflicts, divergences, disagreements of points of view and their negative consequences for participants, and for the communication itself. That is why mutual understanding as a psychological phenomenon still remains poorly understood.
Mutual understanding as the possibility and ability of people to understand each other has long been of interest not only to psychologists, but also to philosophers, historians, political scientists, etc., who argue that the phenomenon of mutual understanding is a key problem of human interaction. The world becomes more diverse, the inner world of a person is constantly individualized, and the more difficult it is for a person to express himself, the more important, vitally necessary for him to be understood. This may explain the growth of research into the problem of mutual understanding in modern science. Along with this, interest in the phenomenon of mutual understanding has also increased in connection with the recognition by scientists of the problem of loneliness as the problem of the century. In modern research, we are talking not only about forced loneliness ( social exclusion, loss of loved ones, living in a new socio-cultural environment), but also about inner loneliness, i.e. alienation from oneself and other people, the cause of which is the lack of mutual understanding.
Traditionally in science there have been and still are two lines of analysis of mutual understanding, connected with the eternal dispute between the "sciences of the spirit" and the "sciences of nature". The first line of analysis was given by W. Dilthey; according to him, we explain nature, and mental life understand. Understanding in his works appears as “feeling into the spiritual world of another”, empathic empathy for his thoughts and feelings. In short, to understand is to comprehend, to assimilate the meaning. The philosopher M. Heidegger attached particular importance to understanding in human life. From his point of view, understanding is a condition for the existence of a person, it is a function of the soul, therefore, rational reasoning and conclusions alone are not enough to achieve mutual understanding. Other means are also needed, in particular, using the terminology of K. Levy-Bruhl, “mystical participation”, something that is connected with the inner subjective world and is not amenable to objective study, external fixation, but it is this that allows us to talk about achieving or not achieving mutual understanding. In the "sciences of nature" understanding is considered as a function of the mind, a special kind of work of consciousness, therefore, mutual understanding is identified with cognition, interpretation, interpretation, persuasion, social and personal meanings. At the level of mental activity, one cannot fully express oneself, therefore mutual understanding is either unattainable, or only partially possible. According to the so-called informational approach, mutual understanding is not necessary, only a correct understanding of social information is sufficient.
Thus, in the "sciences of the spirit" mutual understanding is vital and possible when intuition is connected when comprehending spiritual world another person. Mutual understanding within the framework of these sciences looks like a holistic phenomenon that obeys the law of the hermeneutic circle (the elements do not exist on their own, they are determined by the whole and their study is possible only from the connection of this whole), it cannot be completed, i.e. constantly evolving and improving. In the "sciences of nature" mutual understanding is not given such important role, as in the "sciences of the spirit", and sometimes it is considered as an undesirable element of human life, the properties of static and completeness are attributed to it. In them, mutual understanding is reduced to the search for cause-and-effect relationships that have experimental confirmation Therefore, its study is of a step-by-step nature and does not consist in the knowledge of the whole as such, but in the search for its individual elements.
These two philosophical lines in the interpretation of the nature of mutual understanding received the following refraction in psychology. The first line of analysis largely contributed to the emergence of humanistic psychology, which "absorbed" its ideas about mutual understanding. Although there are very few works on mutual understanding in this psychological direction, this concept itself is invisibly present in all scientists of this orientation as a result, goal and condition of personal development. Proponents of the “human potential” movement associate mutual understanding primarily with communication. Scholars of a humanistic orientation believe that a person does not need to enter into communication if he does not want to understand the other and be understood by him. Representatives of the existential wing of humanistic psychology raise mutual understanding to the level human being. The main characteristics of mutual understanding are integrity, continuous development, positivity, individuality, uniqueness and originality,
The second line of analysis - the philosophical concept of mutual understanding, identified with cognition, interpretation, interpretation - served as the basis for the formation of a psychological direction in the study of mutual understanding, within which it is considered in connection with specific activities. AT this case mutual understanding is studied as a phenomenon that serves a specific activity, the study of which is a priority. In this regard, it is considered from the point of view of how possible - impossible, necessarily - optional, desirable - undesirable, as it is interpreted as an encroachment on the inner world of a person. In the context of this direction, mutual understanding is studied in connection with the style of thinking, types of conflicts, understanding of speech as the main means of communication, correlates with social and individual meanings in joint activities. In domestic psychology, the study of mutual understanding from the standpoint of the second direction is more represented.
In general, the existing directions for the study of mutual understanding in domestic psychology demonstrate two levels of its analysis: 1) considering it from the standpoint of the completeness of mutual understanding (complete, actually mutual understanding), studying it as an equal understanding of information, thoughts, feelings of each other, as a personal formation. V.V. Znakov proposes to call such mutual understanding "interpersonal understanding"; 2) attitude towards mutual understanding as a functional, partial phenomenon (partial mutual understanding), for example, understanding only thoughts or feelings by both partners. Mutual understanding is subject-subjective in nature, but without deep penetration into the inner world of a person.
Despite different approaches to the study of mutual understanding, on various levels its analysis, from existing works it follows that mutual understanding is a complex, holistic process of understanding oneself, another and understanding others. The process of mutual understanding consists of three interrelated components: 1) understanding oneself, 2) understanding the other, 3) understanding the other. Mutual understanding is possible with a common understanding of the information and the situation of communication, since understanding the other does not mean that he also understands you. Mutual understanding unfolds not only between two people, in a dyad, but, as some scientists think, it is possible between an individual and a team, between members of a team, and also between groups. Therefore, mutual understanding can be interpreted in a broad sense as mutual understanding between collectives, communities, peoples and in narrow sense as understanding by subjects of each other in a situation of interpersonal communication. Both in the first and in the second case, the logic of human mutual understanding remains the same: to understand oneself, to understand the other (subject or group) and, finally, to be understood.
LITERATURE
1. Ashrafyan IB. On the mutual understanding of the teacher and students as an internal prerequisite and result pedagogical communication// Psychology of pedagogical communication. Rostov n / D, 1978. S. 49-58.
2. Head EI, Panina NR. Psychology of human mutual understanding. Kiev, 1989. S. 5-8.
3. ZnakovVB. Understanding in knowledge and communication. M., 1997. S. 116-120.
4. Sokolova EE. Thirteen Dialogues on Psychology. M., 1997. S. 423-443.
75. What mechanisms of mutual understanding in communication exist?
The mechanisms of communication (identification, reflection, empathy) are at the same time the mechanisms of the process of mutual understanding. According to many scientists, inner basis and a necessary prerequisite for mutual understanding by people in all cases is the possibility of their identification, their mutual assimilation to each other. It is necessary for the emergence of an integral system, which is what two interacting subjects are. The ability to identify depends on the coincidence (or similarity) of the systems of social and individual meanings that come into contact, as well as on the nature of their mutual evaluation of each other. The construction of communication on the basis of knowing the other through mutual identity, the feeling of being different contributes to the unification in joint activities through the mutual acceptance of roles, because, imagining oneself in the place of another, a person can guess about his inner state. The ability to be different is both the ability to be different and the ability to remain the same. However, identification, i.e. the ability to take the point of view of a partner cannot be identified with understanding. It is impossible to reduce identification to mutual assimilation of people.
If identification is a rational comprehension of a partner, then empathy is the desire to emotionally respond to a person's problems. The emotional nature of empathy is manifested precisely in the fact that the partner’s situation is not so much “thought out” as “felt”. Empathy is similar in certain ways to identification. In both cases, there is the ability to put oneself in the place of another, to look at things from his point of view, but this does not necessarily mean identifying oneself with this person. If a person identifies himself with someone, this means that he builds his behavior the way this “other” builds it. If he shows empathy for him, he simply takes into account the line of his behavior (sympathizes), but his own behavior can be built in a completely different way.
The process of understanding is "complicated" by the phenomenon of reflection - the subject's awareness of how he is perceived by his communication partner. It is no longer just knowing the other or understanding the other, but knowing how the other understands me, a kind of double process. specular reflections each other.
LITERATURE
1. AndreevaGM. Social Psychology. M, 1990. S. 141-147.
WB signs. Understanding in knowledge and communication. M., 1994. S. 130-133.
76. What characteristics of communication determine the features of mutual understanding?
The relationship between communication and mutual understanding is complex and multifunctional. Mutual understanding without communication is impossible; moreover, it is one of the central links of communication. Mutual understanding can be the goal of communication. In this case, people, entering into interpersonal contact, seek to understand the thoughts, feelings, actions of another person and reveal their own inner world of thoughts and feelings. Mutual understanding contributes to the regulation of the behavior of partners. Understanding (or not understanding) each other, partners develop both a certain strategy and tactics of behavior, therefore, mutual understanding contributes to the implementation of joint activities. Finally, mutual understanding can be the result (final product) of communication, in connection with which it forms and predetermines further relationships, motives, and goals of communication.
The very possibility of achieving mutual understanding is determined by the form of communication in which compressed form goals, motives, ways of communication of partners are presented. There are three such forms: game, manipulation, dialogue. Most authors tend to believe that communication is subject-subject relationship. But the dialogue is not only subject-subject, but always personal communication - always a “dialogue of personalities” (according to M, Bakhtin), open communication of free and responsible, independent, recognizing each other's personal autonomy of subjects. Whether or not a dialogue takes place depends on many conditions, but above all on personal maturity communicating, or at least one of them, which, by virtue of this, creates, according to K. Rogers, “healthy personal relationships”, consisting in self-disclosure (see question 73), mutual consistency and realism of requirements for each other, activity, respect and maintaining the desire for each other's growth and happiness, recognizing each other's freedom and relinquishing control over a partner. In dialogue, mutual understanding is the goal, result and condition of communication. The dialogue begins with trust in oneself and others, and therefore with a refusal to control oneself: one’s thoughts (how to put it better), feelings (how to restrain emotions), actions (how to please another), but it is also a refusal to control the other (recognition of his right to think, feel and act independently). Dialogue is the path that a person must follow if he wants to achieve a complete understanding.
Often in life we are faced with a game. human games do not require full understanding. It is possible, but the partners do not set goals to achieve it in the game. This is similar, for example, to a game of chess, when both partners know the rules of the game (how to make moves), have a specific goal that they do not hide - to win. Therefore, they seem to mentally "lose" each other's moves, control the partner, which, by the way, he also knows. It is important for them to understand each other's thoughts, but this does not imply personal self-disclosure, moreover, it can interfere. This type of relationship (with partial mutual understanding) is optimal for the business sphere, where the shift of rational and emotional components may disrupt the course of joint activities.
Manipulation completely excludes mutual understanding, because one of the partners - the manipulator does everything possible so that the partner does not understand him; otherwise, the manipulation will not take place. The goal of the manipulator is to understand the other, to penetrate into his inner world. This is generally a special kind of understanding, since it does not imply a relationship to another, not only as a person, but also as a subject. In other words, the partner is reified. For example, a seller, trying to sell a thing at any cost, is not interested in what the buyer thinks (and will think in the future), what he will feel and how he will act with the acquired thing. Of course, he evaluates, predicts, controls, but in pursuit of "winning" he pursues one goal - to sell. All his knowledge and understanding serves this very purpose.
The achievement of mutual understanding between people is facilitated by the conformity of the socio-historical conditions of people's lives, the same level of their culture, mental development, belonging to the same social groups, common language and the same levels of mastering it. Some identity of the value-semantic positions of partners in communication can be considered the most general prerequisite for mutual understanding. But the listed characteristics of communication are necessary, but not sufficient for the emergence of mutual understanding. The most important condition the appearance of mutual understanding - the coincidence of the ideas of the participants in the interaction. There are four conditions for understanding each other by groups and nations: 1) the similarity of the ideas that groups or nations have about themselves; 2) the correspondence of the idea that one group or nation has about another group or nation, the idea of this group or nation about itself; 3) the correspondence of the idea that one group or nation has about another group or nation to its own idea of a group or nation about itself; 4) the similarity of the ideas that two groups or nations have about other groups or nations. These conditions are also applicable to the situation of dyadic communication, which implies the coincidence of partners' ideas about each other and group communication, for example, during joint activities.
V.V. Signs adds four more conditions for mutual understanding in communication and joint activities: 1) a mnemonic condition (a person understands only what resonates in his memory. For understanding, some preliminary knowledge about what is understood is necessary); 2) target generalized condition (a person usually understands only what corresponds to his forecasts, hypotheses, goals); 3) empathic condition (it is impossible to understand another person without entering into a personal relationship with him, without showing empathy towards him); 4) normative condition (in order to achieve mutual understanding, the subjects of communication must proceed from the same postulates of communication and correlate the subject of discussion with the same social patterns, norms of behavior). But all these prerequisites that help to reach agreement (of interlocutors, groups, communities) still need to be able to implement in a communication situation.
Let us turn to the example given by G.M. Andreeva. A husband who is greeted at the door by his wife with the words “I bought some light bulbs today” can interpret this phrase in a variety of ways: the first option: he needs to go into the kitchen and replace a burned-out light bulb; the second option: the wife spent some amount of money; the third option: the wife takes care of the order in the house, but the husband does not. There may be many options. Thus, mutual understanding is connected with the problem of interpreting the utterance and its understanding, or the problem of encoding information and decoding it. To establish mutual understanding, it is necessary to have a single system of meanings, the coincidence of the “thesauri” of the participants in communication. But even knowing the meanings of the same words (speaking the same language), people may not understand them in the same way. Therefore, a person who wants to be understood by another person must express his thoughts, feelings, desires as unambiguously as possible, so that the information received is clear to the partner. If we apply this rule to the situation described above, then the wife should have clearly formulated her thought, for example: “I bought several electric light bulbs today, please replace the burned out one.”
People encode not only verbal, but also non-verbal information. When a person is in pain, but he smiles, it is difficult for a partner to understand his emotional state: when he says that he wants to understand the interlocutor, but at the same time clenches his fists, mutual understanding is unlikely to take place. Given the huge role of encoding and decoding information in communication, A.A. Kronik proposed to consider mutual understanding as decoding of each other's messages by partners in the process of communication, in which the meaning of messages from the point of view of the perceiver corresponds to their meaning from the point of view of the communicator (producing the message). Mutual understanding turns into decoding by partners of each other's messages, which correspond to the meaning of these messages from the point of view of their authors. Any information transmitted by partners to each other using verbal and non-verbal means can act as a message. The accuracy and reliability of the emerging impression of the interlocutor largely depend on the ability to encode and decode information, which is especially important in a situation of interethnic and interethnic communication, where there are differences both in language and in the use of non-verbal means.
In the process of communication, it is necessary not only to transmit information, but also to listen to the answer. In this regard, another problem arises - the ratio in communication of speaking - listening. According to some researchers, no more than 10% of people have the ability to listen; the rest prefer to talk. This means that in communication they listen to their partner, but do not hear him, as they are busy with their own thoughts. They do not agree, they are looking for arguments, arguments, an appropriate answer, but they do it mentally. In other words, they “listen” mostly to themselves. The previously described mechanisms of mutual understanding can help here, and they, in turn, are associated with the individual characteristics of the communicants.
LITERATURE
Andreeva GM. Social Psychology. M., 1980. S, 99-115.
WB signs. Understanding in knowledge and communication. M., 1994. S. 120-142; 169-178.
4.KronikAA. Methods of experimental research of mutual understanding in Dyad // Psychological journal. 1985. V. 65. S. 124-130.
5. Neumann R. Socio-psychological study of international teams // Psychological conditions social interaction (socio-psychological research). Tallinn, 1983, pp. 85-98.
6.RyumshinaLI. Dialogue - game - manipulation // Psychological Bulletin. Rostov n / D, 1996. S. 206-222.
Shkuratova I.P. Self-expression of personality in communication // Psychology of personality. Textbook allowance ed. P.N. Ermakova IV.A. Labunskaya. M.: EKSMO, 2007, pp. 241-265.
Chapter 3.2. Personal expression in communication
1. Functions and individual features of self-expression of a person in communication
The twenty-first century began as the age of communication. The expansion of the Internet, the development of mobile telephony led to a communication boom. Never before has mankind communicated so intensely and so extensively, it is like a disturbed hive that hums with billions of voices.
In fact, each person is a translator of information, a small station that sends a lot of various information. These innovations pose new problems for psychology related to communication. Psychology should help each person not get lost in this noise and adequately fit into the process of interpersonal communication.
The problem of personal self-expression in communication is becoming the topic of an increasing number of studies in domestic psychology. In our opinion, this is due to two factors. First, the commitment of domestic psychologists to humanistic psychology, the main idea of which is the idea of a person as a subject of his own development and embodiment of himself in various forms of life. Secondly, the paradigm shift in social psychology from the study of the Perceiving Person to the study of the Transmitting Person, which, in turn, is due to the increase in the personal initiative and activity of modern man.
We understand the self-expression of a person in communication as a wide range of verbal and non-verbal behavioral acts that a person uses to convey information about himself to others and create a certain image of himself.
AT foreign psychology The problem of personal self-expression in communication is studied through two phenomena: self-disclosure, which refers to the communication of information about oneself to other people, and self-presentation, which consists in the purposeful creation of a certain impression of oneself in the eyes of others. Most of the works on this issue are devoted to the general patterns of these processes, as well as the factors that determine them.
A person is a complex object of perception, since he is the bearer of a large number of properties that can be perceived mainly through visual and auditory channels. It is possible to single out several levels of self-expression of the individual according to the criterion of awareness, purposefulness and correspondence of the expressive behavior of the individual and its internal content.
1. Involuntary non-verbal self-expression.
2. Arbitrary self-expression using non-verbal means.
3. Arbitrary speech and / or non-verbal self-expression, corresponding to internal state personality;
4. Arbitrary speech and / or non-verbal self-expression, aimed at the formation of a distorted idea of \u200b\u200bhis personality.
As the transition from the first level to the fourth increases awareness, purposefulness, as well as the degree of artificiality of actions performed by the person. In a particular communicative act, these levels of self-expression can be combined. For example, speech behavior can proceed at the fourth level, i.e. carry distorted information about a person, and non-verbal behavior at the same time can unfold at the third level, i.e. express true feelings.
We propose to single out the following functions of self-expression.
1. The existential function is that, by sending information about his personality, a person asserts the fact of his existence and claims that others include him in social interaction.
2. The adaptive function is manifested in the fact that self-expression, first of all, is aimed at including a particular person in a complex social system because a person acts as an executor of a large number of social roles that society provides him.
3. The communicative function is genetically original, since all information sent by a person is addressed to other people; without an audience, it is devoid of any meaning.
4. The identification function is that the self-expression of the individual is aimed at reflecting his belonging to certain social groups or psychological types. This allows the audience to immediately recognize the person as a representative of some social community.
5. The function of regulating interpersonal relations is based on the fact that the amount of information sent, its content, frequency, reciprocity, leads to a certain character interpersonal relationships. People build their relationships using self-expression to achieve a certain distance, position and sign of the relationship.
6. The transformative function is that the self-expression of one person causes certain changes in those people who have become the recipients of the information received. They may change from different sign(socially desirable or negative), different in size (another's example can even become an impetus for a change in lifestyle), self-expression can affect a different number of people (fans or opponents of this style of presenting oneself). All this will depend on the scale of the individual and the degree of novelty of his contribution to the development of the tradition of self-expression.
7. The function of self-regulation is due to the fact that self-expression serves as a means of coordinating the self-concept of a person and her behavior. Self-expression also contributes to the release of emotional stress and discharge.
8. The function of self-embodiment is related to the fact that, by expressing himself in communication with other people, a person creates in their minds an image of himself that exists regardless of his earthly existence. Using indirect forms of self-expression (written texts, portraits, photographs, audio and video materials), a person perpetuates himself as a representative of a certain era and geographical environment.
People differ significantly in the means that they use to express themselves in communication, and in the tasks that they set for themselves in this regard. An analysis of the literature allows us to identify seven main characteristics that are important for describing an individual strategy for self-expression of a person in communication.
1. The degree of awareness and purposefulness of the information sent to oneself. People vary greatly in their ability to manage the process of forming impressions of themselves in others. In Western psychology, the process of controlling one's own impression is called self-monitoring. M. Snyder found that people who are prone to self-monitoring follow social norms more, control their self-expression better, imitate others more, are more demonstrative and conformal (4).
2. Natural or artificial created image. This is one of key points in the problem of self-expression of personality in communication. Often it is solved in a simplified way by attributing naturalness and sincerity to the phenomenon of self-disclosure, and artificiality and distortion of the image to the phenomenon of self-presentation. In fact, self-disclosure has many types, and far from all of them a person remains completely sincere. In addition, self-disclosure is never completely complete and factual. Any story about oneself contains a “literary” component, which includes the interpretation of what happened, genre moments, orientation to the expectations of the audience, and much more, which leads the narrator away from the true event. Self-presentation also takes many forms, ranging from the presentation of traits that are really inherent in the subject, to the presentation of absolutely incorrect information about oneself. Each person uses the whole palette of opportunities for self-disclosure and self-presentation, depending on the requirements of the situation and their own motives, however, the ratio of true and distorted information, as well as the boundaries of acceptable lies, is different for each person.
3. Activity of personal self-expression in communication. In relation to self-disclosure, it can be defined through such characteristics as its volume, duration and frequency. In self-presentation, activity is manifested in the desire of the individual to be in the center of attention of others, in demonstrative behavior, in the use of integration and self-promotion strategies. As a rule, the activity of self-expression is more characteristic of persons striving for leadership, social recognition, and the development of their professional career.
4. The breadth of self-expression of the individual. It can be determined by the number of areas of communication to which the transmission of the personality of its characteristics extends. First of all, it is family-related, business and friendly spheres of communication. Through the spheres of contact communication, a person goes to wider social communities in which he can also present himself. These include professional, national, religious, party, club and other social groups. The next level of presentation is associated with the state level, and even higher level - with international influence. The breadth of self-expression is connected with the scale of the personality, with its ability to influence events of different social levels.
5. Variation of the presented images. This characteristic is manifested in the ability to change images in different situations of interpersonal interaction. The need to look and act differently is associated, firstly, with a large number of roles that a person performs, and secondly, with the variability of situations in which his communication takes place. In accordance with these two factors, one can conditionally single out cross-partner variability of self-presentation, which means that a person changes the strategy of his behavior depending on the partner with whom he communicates, and cross-situational variability, which is associated with a change in behavior depending on the requirements of the situation. Psychologists assess the individual's tendency to variability in their behavior in different ways. M. Snyder regards it as evidence of the desire to manage the impression made on others, others consider it as a manifestation of social competence. There are large differences between people in the ability to change their image and behavior (4).
6. Normativity or cultural self-expression of the individual. It has already been said above that a person in his self-expression must be in a certain role position. Each social role contains prescriptions for its performance, which exist as a tradition in the culture to which the person himself refers. In the past, these regulations were very strict, and a person who deviated from traditional behavior within the framework of a social role was severely punished, up to expulsion from society. Modern world provides a person with ample opportunities to choose both the roles themselves and the options for their execution based on different cultural traditions. Personal identification mechanisms have a great influence on the choice of the way of presenting oneself in communication with other people, since a person strives to be perceived not only as a private person, but also as a representative of a certain social community.
7. Creativity of self-expression of the personality. Each person has the opportunity to take a ready-made image for the performance of a social role or to bring new aspects to its performance based on personal experience. creative people create new opportunities to express themselves through clothing, speech, self-presentation strategies used, which then become the property of the masses.
The identified individual features of personality self-expression are stable and can serve as a basis for predicting the behavior of a person in a particular act of communication.
2. Self-disclosure in interpersonal communication: types, characteristics and functions
The study of self-disclosure began within humanistic psychology in the 1950s. It was no coincidence, since it was this direction that began to consider a person as a subject own life. This was also manifested in terms introduced by its representatives: self-actualization, self-expression, self-disclosure and self-development. Fundamental for the formation of humanistic psychology were the works of A. Maslow, in which self-creation was first considered as an integral property of human nature.
S. Jurard defined self-disclosure as the process of communicating information about oneself to other people; the conscious and voluntary disclosure of one's Self to another (1). The content of self-disclosure can be thoughts, feelings of a person, facts of his biography, current life problems, his relationship with other people, impressions from works of art, life principles and much more.
The need for self-disclosure is inherent in every person, and it must be necessarily satisfied, since its suppression can cause not only psychological problems, but also various mental and somatic diseases. Each person has a need to open himself to at least one significant other. Self-disclosure plays a central role in the development and existence of interpersonal relationships. It is an indicator of the depth and degree of positive relationships (sympathy, love, friendship). As relationships progress to more intimate ones, people tell themselves more fully and deeply. In essence, self-disclosure means the initiation of another person into one's inner world, the removal of the curtain separating the "I" from the "Other". This is the most direct way of transmitting one's individuality to others. Self-disclosure is a complex and multifaceted process of expressing personality in communication, sensitive to many individual-personal, socio-demographic and situational factors (3). It can proceed in a direct or indirect form, with varying degrees of awareness, using verbal and non-verbal channels of information transfer, and be oriented to a different number of recipients. Consider the main types of self-disclosure.
According to the criterion of the source of the initiative, self-disclosure can be voluntary or compulsory. The degree of voluntariness varies: from the fervent desire of the person himself to tell another person about his feelings or thoughts to the “pulling out” of this information by the partner. Telling about yourself under interrogation can be an example of forced self-disclosure.
By the type of contact between the subject of communication and the recipient, one can single out direct and indirect self-disclosure. Direct self-disclosure is observed in the situation of physical contact of the subject of self-disclosure with the recipient, during which they can see and hear each other. Indirect self-disclosure can be by telephone, written text, electronic text on the Internet. Direct self-disclosure enables the subject to receive audio-visual feedback from the recipient and, accordingly, control the process of self-disclosure (expand or collapse, deepen, etc.). At the same time, the presence of a person fetters the speaker, especially when reporting negative information. It is no coincidence that Z. Freud came up with the idea during a psychoanalytic session to sit down behind the head of a client lying on a couch so that there would be no eye contact between them. In everyday life, people prefer to report negative actions (such as breaking up a relationship) by phone or in writing. Written form distances partners and deprives them of a large amount of information transmitted through a non-verbal channel (voice intonation, facial expressions, etc.). In addition, it is associated with a large delay in the exchange of information, although this is overcome on the Internet: in a forum you can communicate in real time.
Diary entries are a special form of mediated self-disclosure. They, as a rule, are conducted by a person for himself in order to fix the events of his life in memory and streamline life impressions. They differ in the degree of intimacy of the topics covered in them and the detail of the descriptions. The authors of the diaries have different attitudes towards the possibility of reading them by other people. There are blogs on the Internet personal diaries that are open to the public. Readers can comment on the entries, discuss the identity of their author. Newspaper or Internet announcements about the desire to enter into love or friendship can also be considered as examples of self-disclosure, although self-presentation of personality prevails here.
Self-disclosure is greatly influenced by the number of people for whom it is intended. In Western psychology, the person or group of persons to whom information is addressed is called the target of self-disclosure. . Most often, the target is one person, and his characteristics (socio-demographic and personal characteristics, the nature of relations with the speaker) to a large extent determine the content and formal characteristics of self-disclosure. Sometimes the target of self-disclosure is a small group (for example, family members, work colleagues, fellow travelers in a train compartment). In this case, as a rule, the degree of intimacy of the reported information, its detail is reduced. A special form is self-disclosure in psychological training groups or in psychotherapeutic groups. They first create an atmosphere of mutual trust and looseness, which allows its participants to fearlessly report information about themselves that can compromise them in the eyes of those present.
The target of self-disclosure may be large groups people, all the way down to humanity. It can be called public self-disclosure. His examples are interviews of famous people in the media, autobiographies published in the form of books. The goals of such self-disclosure differ from the previous forms. Public self-disclosure is always aimed at drawing attention to oneself and creating a certain impression about oneself. It includes a large element of self-presentation, since it is not always sincere.
According to the criterion of distance and formalization of communication, self-disclosure is personal and role. Role self-disclosure unfolds within the framework of the role in which a person is at a given moment in time. For example, being in the role of a patient at a doctor's appointment, a person talks about himself mainly that is connected with his illness. At the same time, a person can touch on intimate details and not feel embarrassed, since communication takes place at the role level. Personal self-disclosure presupposes the existence of relationships of sympathy, friendship, love, which are the basis for self-disclosure. The nature of these relations regulates the direction and content of self-disclosure.
The degree of preparedness by the subject of the process of self-disclosure can be distinguished unintentional and prepared. When a person in the process of communication spontaneously reveals information about his personality, this is an example of unintentional self-disclosure. Sometimes this happens in response to someone else's frankness, or out of a desire to entertain the interlocutor. When a person plans in advance to communicate some information about himself to another person or group of people, then we are dealing with prepared self-disclosure. For example, a young man can carefully consider the wording of a declaration of love to his girlfriend . Moreover, he can take care of the environment in which it will be done.
Another important indicator of self-disclosure is the degree sincerity the subject of self-disclosure, which manifests itself in the reliability of the information communicated to oneself. Any information provided by a person about himself is not complete and absolutely reliable. When a person makes deliberate changes to this message, then we are dealing with pseudo-self-disclosure.
In addition to the above features, self-disclosure has a number of characteristics that can be determined using psychological methods.
Under depth self-disclosure refers to the detail, completeness and sincerity of coverage of a particular topic. In contrast to this superficial self-disclosure involves incomplete and partial coverage of some aspects of one's personality. Some authors associate depth intimacy disclosed information. In our opinion, this is wrong, since intimacy is associated with the subject of self-disclosure.
Studies of foreign and domestic psychologists have shown that there are open and closed topics. Open topics are characterized by high self-disclosure and contain, as a rule, neutral information about the interests and tastes, attitudes and opinions of a person. Closed topics include information about the sexual sphere, about the teleman, his personal qualities and finances. Self-disclosure on these topics is intimate, as it is about what the person hides the most. In the US, the topic of sources and volume of income is more closed than the topic of health.
Latitude self-disclosure is determined by the amount of information and the variety of topics on which a person is revealed. Telling another about himself, the subject may touch on only one topic or several topics. The depth and breadth of self-disclosure constitute its general volume (or intensity). People differ greatly in the degree of self-disclosure, which reflects the concept of “openness norm” introduced by S. Jurard.
Selectivity self-disclosure reflects the ability of a person to vary the content and volume of self-disclosure in communication with different people. Psychologists have found great differences in the characteristics of self-disclosure of the same person in communication with different partners. Some people, when describing some event in their life, repeat the same story, other people modify it depending on the partner.
Differentiation self-disclosure can be defined as the ability of a person to change the volume and depth of self-disclosure depending on the topic. Individual differences lie in how much a person can change the volume and depth of self-disclosure depending on the topic. The combination of selectivity and differentiation makes it possible to judge flexibility self-disclosure, which reflects the ability to rebuild a message about oneself depending on one's own goals, the characteristics of the situation and the partner.
Emotionality self-disclosure is characterized by the general emotional saturation of the message, as well as the ratio of positive and negative information reported about oneself. To convey his feelings at the moment of self-disclosure, a person uses verbal means (use of metaphors, epithets, etc.), paralinguistic (speed of speech, loudness, etc.) and extralinguistic (pauses, laughter, crying) means. Self-disclosure can be boastful, entertaining, mournful, instructive.
Duration self-disclosure is measured by the time spent on it by a person in the process of experiment or natural behavior. The temporal characteristics of self-disclosure also include the proportion between listening and narration, as well as between narration about oneself and on abstract topics.
So, the main characteristics of self-disclosure are: depth, completeness and breadth (which together make up the volume of self-disclosure), duration, the ratio of positive and negative information about oneself (affective characteristics), flexibility (which consists of differentiation and selectivity). If we compile a table of types of self-disclosure based on the criteria discussed above, then it will look like this.
Types of self-disclosure
| Criterion | Types of self-disclosure |
| 1. source of initiative | voluntary and forced |
| 2. kind of contact | direct and indirect |
| H. target of self-disclosure | one person or group |
| 4. distance | personal and role |
| 5. premeditation | unintentional and prepared |
| 6. degree of sincerity | true or pseudo self-disclosure |
| 7. depth | deep and superficial |
| thematic or diverse |
|
| 9. emotionality | affective and neutral |
| 10. emotional tone | positive or negative |
Self-disclosure permeates the fabric of interpersonal communication of people, performing a number of important psychological functions.
1. It promotes the mental health of the communicator's personality.
2. Self-disclosure develops the personality because it promotes self-knowledge and self-determination.
3. It is a means of self-regulation of the personality due to the mechanism of emotional discharge, clarification of the problem situation through its verbal analysis, receiving emotional support from the interlocutor. The latter significantly reduces a person's mental stress and is the main goal of confessional forms of self-disclosure.
Self-disclosure is also important for the recipient. It helps him to get to know the subject of self-disclosure better, and also gives him the feeling that he is needed, that he is trusted. In general, self-disclosure contributes to the development and maintenance of interpersonal relationships.
3 . The influence of the personality of the recipient and relations with him on the process
self-disclosure
In domestic psychology, the influence of the time factor of acquaintance on the process of self-disclosure is considered in the work of A.K. Bolotova (2). It is based on the ideas of S. Altman and D. Taylor, who analyze mutual self-disclosure in the process of developing relations from the standpoint of the theory of social exchange. From their point of view, self-disclosure should be mutual and gradual. If one of the partners begins to force things and give too much intimate information about themselves, then the suddenness and untimeliness of such self-disclosure can even lead to a break in relations. These authors believe that if people are focused on long-term relationships, then they self-disclose slowly and step by step, but if the relationship is obviously short-lived, then self-disclosure can be deep and easy at once (as, for example, with a fellow traveler on a train).
Mutual openness is a necessary condition for the development of relations at the initial stages. When the relationship has become stronger, reciprocal frankness does not have to follow immediately after the partner's self-disclosure. But if it does not occur for a long period of time, then the relationship deteriorates.
In a study by K. Levin and M. Knapp, it was shown that if people do not feel reciprocity in self-disclosure from each other for a long time as emotional relationships deepen, then their relationship will never reach the stage of integration (2). People who are in long-term intimate relationships (for example, spouses) are more selective in the topics of reciprocal self-disclosure to their partner than in relation to unfamiliar people. Apparently, this is due to the great consequences for close people of mutual self-disclosure.
LB Filonov analyzed the stages of development of interpersonal relations, singled out the functional purpose of each stage and the change in the personal states of communication partners (6).
1 stage. Consent accumulation.Partners develop an idea of the desirability and possibility of building relationships. Both parties strive to agree on assessments.
2 stage. Search common interests .Partners are looking for a field of common interests. Topics of communication are neutral: hobbies, sports, politics.
3 stage. Acceptance of personal qualities of a partner and principles of communication that he offers. Self-disclosure at the level of personal characteristics, habits, principles.
4 stage. Finding qualities that are dangerous for communication. Deeper probing of the partner. Challenge frankness in the realm of shortcomings. Attempts of self-disclosure in the area of negative personal qualities, sometimes in a veiled form.
5 stage. Adaptation of partners to each other. Acceptance of each other's personality traits. Deepening mutual frankness based on greater mutual trust.
6 stage. Achieving compatibility in a pair. The distribution of roles, the formation of a system of relations. Developing a sense of "we". Identification of the way of thinking and way of life of the partner. Self-disclosure at the level of meanings and life plans.
As can be seen from a brief description of the stages of development of relations, self-disclosure acts, on the one hand, as a means of developing relations, and on the other hand, as their result. It moves from neutral and superficial to intimate and profound.
There is a lot of evidence that the process of self-disclosure and satisfaction with the result of self-disclosure depend to a very large extent on the behavior of the recipient.
Modern psycholinguistics recognizes active role listener. The addressee (the target of self-disclosure) is a full member of the communicative act throughout its entire length. If we keep in mind the dialogue model of communication, which is most typical for a situation of self-disclosure between close people, then there is a constant change in the positions of the communicator and the recipient.
One of the important problems of personality psychology and social psychology is the study of the characteristics of the recipient's personality, which contribute to a more complete and easy self-disclosure of the communicator. There are a number of professions (journalists, doctors, lawyers, psychologists) for which the ability to call other people openly is a professionally important quality. The effectiveness of any type of psychotherapy is based on the client's trust in the psychotherapist and the readiness to give intimate information about himself.
Foreign researchers call people who know how to call the interlocutor to frankness, "opener", which literally translates from English as "opener". L. Miller, J. Berg and R. Archer in 1983 developed a 10-item questionnaire aimed at diagnosing this ability (8). In it, the subject is asked to evaluate how inclined he is to listen to other people's confessions, and whether he can increase someone else's frankness. Majority foreign research related to the problem of calling for frankness, is based on the application of this technique.
S.R. Colvin and D. Longueil studied personality and behavioral features people capable of causing self-disclosure of a communication partner (8). They found that women rate their ability to cause someone else's self-disclosure higher than men. An additional survey of the subjects made it possible to find that when filling out this methodology, they adhere to different strategies. When answering questions, women usually imagined their past experience of communicating with strangers, while men imagined their past experience of communicating with friends and relatives. In addition, it turned out that the motivation for calling their partner to be frank differed: women did this in order to initiate a new acquaintance, and men in order to determine the partner's ability to help them. This confirms the data on greater egocentrism and pragmatic orientation in the communication of men compared to women.
In a study by D. Schaffer and L. Pegalis, it was studied how the ability of the interviewee to call the partner to frankness affects the success of the interviewer (12). For this purpose, 72 pairs of unfamiliar female students with extreme values of the ability to call a partner to frankness were formed. They found that interviewers with high ability were only more skillful when they interviewed girls with low ability. Conversely, girls with low scores on the Miller Inventory performed better when interviewed with highly capable girls. The authors believe that in last case interviewees with high social skills had a positive influence on inept interviewers. They relieved their tension, which led to a better communication situation, which ultimately contributed to greater self-disclosure of the respondents.
Thus, we can conclude that self-disclosure depends on many factors related to the personalities of the subjects of communication and the relationships they are in at the moment.
4. Strategies and tactics of self-presentation
In foreign psychology, one of central issues The study of self-presentation is the question of the strategies and tactics of self-presentation. Interest in this problem is due to its great practical significance, since each person, on the one hand, wants to skillfully master these strategies, and on the other hand, seeks to see and recognize them in the behavior of their communication partners. To date, a large empirical material has been accumulated, indicating the influence of many socio-psychological and personal characteristics of the subject of self-presentation and his partner, as well as the circumstances of their interaction on the implementation of different strategies and tactics for presenting one's image (1, 5, 7).
The strategy of self-presentation is a set of behavioral acts of the personality, separated in time and space, aimed at creating a certain image in the eyes of others. The self-presentation tactic is a certain technique by which the chosen strategy is implemented. A self-presentation strategy can include many individual tactics. The tactics of self-presentation is a short-term phenomenon and is aimed at creating the desired impression in a specific life situation.
E. Jones and T. Pittman in 1982 created one of the first classifications of self-presentation strategies based on the goals and tactics that people use in communicating with others (9). In their opinion, self-presentation allows a person to use various sources of power, expanding and maintaining influence in interpersonal relationships.
1. The desire to please - integration. This strategy is designed for the power of charm. The main tactic is to please other people, to flatter and agree, to present socially approved qualities. The goal is to appear attractive.
2. Self-promotion is a demonstration of competence that grants the power of an expert. The main tactic is to prove one's superiority and boast. The goal is to appear competent.
3. Exemplary - the desire to serve as an example for other people, which gives the power of a mentor. The main tactic is to demonstrate spiritual superiority, combined with boasting and the desire to discuss and condemn other people. The goal is to appear morally blameless.
4. Intimidation is a demonstration of power that forces others to obey and gives the power of fear. The main tactic is threat. The goal is to appear dangerous.
5. Demonstration of weakness or pleading. Obliges others to help, which gives the power of compassion. The main tactic is to ask for help, to beg. The goal is to appear weak.
According to foreign data, the most common are the first three self-presentation strategies, since they correspond to socially approved behavior.
R. Baumeister distinguishes two strategies of self-presentation, differing in the ways in which they are achieved and in the rewards they achieve: “pleasant strategy” - aims to put oneself in a favorable light, is controlled by external criteria (adjustment to the audience) and achieves an external reward - approvals; "self-constructing" - criteria and rewards within the person himself, a person maintains and strengthens his "ideal self", which makes an impression on others (10).
D. Tedeschi and Lindskold single out the assertive and defensive types of strategies:
· affirmative strategy involves behavior aimed at creating a positive identity in the eyes of others;
· defensive strategy is aimed at restoring a positive identity and eliminating a negative image (11).
The first strategy consists of an active, but not aggressive, effort to create a positive impression. Defensive strategies include justification, intimidation, pleading, and other forms of socially frowned upon behavior.
The most detailed classification of self-presentation strategies was carried out by A. Schutz, who, on the basis of summarizing a large amount of literature on this issue, identified her own criteria for categorizing tactics and strategies of self-presentation (11).
As such criteria, she proposed to consider the installation of creating a positive image or avoiding bad image, the degree of activity of the subject in creating the image and the degree of manifestation of the subject's aggressiveness in the process of self-presentation. Based on a combination of these criteria, she identifies four groups of self-presentation strategies.
1. Positive self-presentation. The motto is "I'm good." This type of self-presentation contains active but non-aggressive actions to create a positive impression of oneself. This group includes the strategies of the desire to please, self-promotion, serving as an example. The main tactics are as follows:
· Bask in the rays of someone else's glory. It was first described by R. Cialdini, who studied the psychology of influence. It is based on associating oneself with famous and respected people.
Associating oneself with important and positive events (for example, a person characterizes himself as a participant in a battle or construction site).
· Strengthening the significance and importance of those events in which a person participated, and those people with whom he had a chance to communicate.
Demonstration of influence. A person inspires others with the possibility of great positive consequences from his actions. This tactic is especially characteristic of politicians.
· Demonstration of identification with the audience. A person demonstrates the closeness of his views, attitudes to those people who are directed by self-presentation.
2. Offensive self-presentation. Based on the desire to look good, denigrating other people. it aggressive way creating the desired image, all tactics of which are aimed at criticizing a competitor. The following tactics apply here:
· Undermining the opposition. Negative information about a competitor is reported in order to look better against its background.
· Critical installation in the assessment of any phenomena of reality. It creates the illusion of the speaker's competence in relation to the topic under discussion.
· Criticizing the address of those who criticize him. This creates the illusion of bias on the part of the critics. For example, politicians often accuse journalists of being bribed.
· Changing the topic of discussion in a winning direction.
3. Safety self-presentation. Sets a goal not to look bad. A person avoids the opportunity to give a negative impression of himself by avoiding interaction with other people.
The tactics used in this case are as follows:
Avoiding public attention
Minimal self-disclosure.
· Careful self-description. A person does not talk not only about his shortcomings, but also about his merits, so as not to find himself in a situation where he cannot confirm his skills.
· Minimization of social interaction.
4. Defensive self-presentation. The subject is active in creating the image, but has an attitude to avoid the negative image. This strategy usually unfolds when a person is accused of being involved in some undesirable event. The greater the role of a person in this event, and the more difficult it is, the more difficult it is for a person to change his negative image in the direction of a positive one.
This strategy is characterized by the following tactics of self-justification.
event denial. A person denies the very fact of a negative event, in connection with which he is accused.
· Changing the interpretation of the event in order to reduce the negative assessment of it. The person recognizes the very fact of the event, but presents it in a more positive way.
Dissociation. A person underestimates the degree of his negative participation in this event, seeks to dissociate himself from it.
· Justification. A person can insist on the legality of his actions, or give arguments in his favor.
· Apologies. The person claims that he could not do otherwise because he could not control the course of events.
Confession of guilt and repentance, a promise not to repeat mistakes in the future.
These tactics can be deployed sequentially as the blaming party gains more information about the negative event, but can also be used separately.
This classification also does not cover the whole range of strategies and tactics of self-presentation. In the works of M. Seligman, the tactics of learned helplessness was described, which consists in the fact that a person deliberately portrays an inability to perform actions or actions required of him in the expectation that the people around him will help him (4) . This tactic is implemented as part of the strategy of demonstrating weakness, because other strategies identified by E. Jones and T. Pitman are based on demonstrating superiority over a partner. If a person was actually able to cope with the problem on his own, then this behavior can be classified as a manipulative tactic.
Psychologically close to it is the tactic of creating artificial obstacles by the person himself on the way to achieving the goal, which was studied by S. Steven and E. Johnson (4). A person defends his self-esteem and his public image, explaining failures by external circumstances or situational factors (malaise, lack of time for preparation, competitive advantages, etc.). The tactics of praising an opponent is a win-win, because if he wins, a person proves to others that he had a strong and worthy opponent. If the man himself wins, then his victory is doubly honorable. False modesty tactics also greatly increase the positive image of a person, especially in those cultures that value self-restraint (for example, in Japan, China, Russia). But the same tactics in the USA will bring a person opposite effect, since it is customary there to openly declare their successes and abilities.
M. Leary and co-authors single out such tactics as painting (11). In English, she received the name "Adonization" by the name of the mythological hero Adonis, who was in love with himself. The goal of this tactic is to look outwardly attractive. The implementation of this tactic is rather complicated, since the criteria for attractiveness are different for different people, so the subject of self-presentation must know well the tastes of the audience for which the design of his appearance is designed.
In conclusion, it should be noted that a person uses many tactics of self-presentation, depending on the situation in which he finds himself, but at the same time, he has the most preferred methods that most adequately correspond to his image. Each person builds his image based on his gender, age, belonging to a particular culture, social class, profession and his personal characteristics.
Literature
1. Amyaga N.V. Self-disclosure and self-presentation of personality in communication // Personality. Communication. group processes. M., 1991.- S. 37-74.
2. Bolotova A.K. Psychology of time in interpersonal relationships. M.: Publishing House of MPSI, 1997. 120 p.
3. Zinchenko E.V. Self-disclosure of personality as a socio-psychological phenomenon // Applied Psychology, 1998, No. 5, pp. 59-69.
5. Sokolova-Baush E.A. Self-presentation as a factor in the formation of an impression about the communicator and the recipient // Mirpsikhologii, 1999, No. 3, pp. 132-139.
6. Filonov L.B. Psychological aspects of establishing contacts between people. Technique of contact interaction. Pushchino, 1982. 40 s.
7. Shkuratova I.P., Gotseva Yu.A. Self-presentation of adolescents in interpersonal communication // Applied Psychology: Achievements and Prospects. Rostov-on-Don, publishing house Foliant, 2004, pp. 267-283.
8. Colvin C.R., Longueuil D. ElicitihgSelf-Disclosure: The Personality and Behavioral Correlates of the Opener Scale // Journal of Research in Personality, 2001, 35, pp. 238-246.
9. Jones E.E., Pittman T.S. Toward ageneral theory of strategic self-presentation // Psychological perspectives of the self. Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1982, pp. 231-263.
10.LearyM.R., Kovalsky R.M. Impression management: a literature review and two-component model // Psychological bulletin, 1990, vol.107, No.1, pp.34-47.
11. Schutz A. Assertive, Offensive, Protective and Defencive Styles of Self-presentation: aTaxonomy // Journal of psychology interdisciplinary and applied. 1997, vol.132,pp.611-619.
12.ShafferD. R., Pegalis L. The “opener”: Highly skilled as interviewee // Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 1990, vol. 16(3), pp.511-520.
I.P. Shkuratova
Self-Disclosure Motivation in Interpersonal Communication
The study of self-disclosure of personality in communication in the last two decades in foreign psychology has resulted in an independent scientific direction, located on the border between social psychology and personality psychology. The database of the American Psychological Association for five years from 1989 to 1995 includes 255 monographs and 583 articles that address various aspects of this multifaceted problem. Psychology, like probably no other science, has amazing property allow multiple reinterpretations; old empirical material through the prism of newly created concepts. At the same time, the new concept does not at all cancel the old interpretations, but only makes it possible to look inside the magic crystal, which is the personality, through its new facet. This is what happened with the concept of self-disclosure. For a long time they managed without it, not singling it out into a separate subject area, however, the shift in emphasis from the Perceiving Man to the Translating Man, associated with the spirit of the present time, showed the need to seriously and in detail deal with this problem.
Its great theoretical and practical significance and interconnectedness with a number of other problems of interpersonal interaction immediately became apparent. An analysis of the abstracts of articles contained in the American Psychological Association Database shows which aspects of self-disclosure research are priorities for psychologists in different countries. In terms of the number of works, the problem of self-disclosure of persons who have deviations from the physical or social norm, in other words, people who have to hide their peculiarity from others, comes to the fore in the number of works. These include AIDS patients, lesbians, homosexuals, drug addicts, victims sexual abuse. Especially a lot of work is devoted to the study of the relationship of people with non-traditional sexual orientation. In second place is the study of adolescents, for whom self-disclosure also presents some difficulty due to their age features. The third place is occupied by publications that discuss the influence of self-disclosure of the patient and the psychotherapist on the course of the psychotherapeutic process. Moreover, if the self-disclosure of the patient is perceived by everyone as a prerequisite for success, then there is no unanimity of opinion among representatives of different areas of psychotherapy regarding the self-disclosure of the psychotherapist. The remaining works are devoted to the analysis of various external and intrapersonal factors that contribute to or hinder self-disclosure, and cross-cultural differences. Along with self-disclosure, self-presentation is being actively studied, which is understood as the desire to make a certain impression on others.
An analysis of the direction of these works shows that the authors are more focused on the study of the phenomenology of self-disclosure than on the study of its motivational and semantic side. At the same time, it becomes clear that further progress in understanding the nature of this phenomenon becomes impossible without referring to the motivation of self-disclosure, because depending on the goals and motives of interaction, the content of self-disclosure can completely change in one and the same person. Unfortunately, in most publications, the authors do not so much study the process of self-disclosure itself, but rather the relationship between the result of the answer to the Jurard questionnaire and other personality test indicators or characteristics of the situation in which the measurement took place. Such an approach is not only insufficient, but even incorrect, since researchers operate with a certain final total indicator of self-disclosure, to which such disparate intimacy topics as "my favorite dishes" and "my fears and anxieties" contribute equally.
The distinction between self-disclosure and self-presentation, proposed in foreign literature, also does not seem to me to reflect their main difference. D. Myers defines self-presentation as "an act of self-expression and behavior aimed at creating a favorable impression or an impression corresponding to someone's ideals". In fact, self-presentation can be aimed at the exact opposite goal, namely the creation of an unfavorable impression. Suffice it to recall the behavior of a professional beggar, talentedly depicted by L. Akhedzhakova in the film "Promised Heaven". She, depending on the social orientation of a passerby, could present herself as a victim Stalinist repressions, then as a victim of perestroika. Sometimes self-disclosure is opposed to self-presentation according to the criterion of truthfulness and depth of the created image. N.V. Amyaga believes that "superficial, shallow self-disclosure is more often associated with pronounced self-presentation and can be described rather as self-presentation". Shallow self-disclosure can be observed in a situation of ordinary exchange of opinions between speakers, in which no other goals are pursued at all. It seems to me that the main difference between these two forms of self-expression lies in the goals that a person pursues in one or another case. If a person needs psychological help, it is more likely that he will be as sincere as possible. Although even in such situations, a person tries to talk about himself in such a way that his image has more positive features. If the goal of communication is to win the sympathy of the interlocutor or receive material or other business assistance from him, the subject resorts to presenting himself in the form in which, from his point of view, he can achieve best result. At the same time, it is not at all necessary that he gives false information about himself, it is enough to simply emphasize the presence of the corresponding qualities. Although here we were talking about goals, it must be borne in mind that very often they are poorly or not at all realized by the subject of self-disclosure, therefore it is more correct to talk about motives. A person may or may not be aware of the motives that prompt him to tell about himself to one or another person. this work was devoted to the study of the question of the extent to which people are able to realize these motives, whether there is a connection between the motives he calls and the content of self-disclosure with different interlocutors.
The purpose of the described study was to study the motivation of self-disclosure in interpersonal communication, which was specified in the following tasks: 1) to study the relationship between self-disclosure and the motivation to communicate with people from the immediate environment; 2) to analyze the motives of self-disclosure in communication with different people; 3) to explore the relationship between motivation and the content of self-disclosure in communication.
To solve the first problem, under my leadership, A.G. Bovina, an experimental study was conducted, in which 19 women and 9 men aged 21 to 67 years old, who worked at the factory, took part. They were asked to fill out forms for the Interpersonal Motivation Diagnostic Test (IMO) and the Self-Disclosure Diagnostic Test. In the MMO test, developed by me on the basis of J. Kelly's repertoire test, the subject was first asked to make a list of people who form his real environment in the family, at work and in the friendly sphere, and then assess how different communication motives are characteristic of his interaction with each from the said persons. Based on the data obtained, it was possible to determine the degree of expression of individual categories of motives, as well as the magnitude of the motivation for communication of the subject with each of the persons indicated by him. The test for diagnosing self-disclosure was developed by me on the basis of the self-disclosure test by S. Jurard. During its execution, the subject had to evaluate how detailed and frankly he tells about different aspects of his personality to the same people who were noted by him in the previous method. The test made it possible to determine the amount of self-disclosure of each subject in certain categories of topics (interests, opinions, work, personality, relationships with other people, body and finances), as well as in communication with each specific acquaintance.
To identify the relationship between the degree of expression of individual groups of communication motives and self-disclosure on these topics, a correlation analysis of the data obtained was carried out. He showed the absence of a connection between the total indicators of self-disclosure and communication motivation and the presence of a fairly large number of links between particular indicators. This indicates that it is impossible to talk about greater self-disclosure of those people who love communication and strive for it. Self-disclosure occupies only a certain part in the structure of communication, and therefore it is quite possible to combine a great need for communication with a limited desire for stories about oneself. Each person has his own proportion between listening and narration, as well as between narration about himself and on abstract topics.
An analysis of the correlations between the motives of communication and the topics of self-disclosure showed the following picture. It turned out that the more egocentric motives (receiving any kind of help and support) were represented in the structure of communication motivation, the greater the share of self-disclosure about work (r = 0.48 P
I was also interested in the question of whether there is a correspondence between the motivation of communication with specific person and the amount of self-disclosure addressed to him. For this, the following data processing procedure was carried out. Each subject was identified three people from his list of acquaintances, in relation to whom he has the maximum motivation for communication, as well as three people with whom he is extremely frank. A similar procedure was carried out with respect to those people with whom the subject had minimal communication motivation and minimal self-disclosure. Then, for each subject, the degree of agreement between these data series was calculated. It turned out that maximum values on the motivation of communication and self-disclosure coincided in 62 cases out of 84 possible matches, and the minimum in 55 cases out of 84 possible. At the same time, 65 matches were observed in 13 subjects, 43 matches in 11 people and 12 matches in only 4 people. This gives grounds to believe that there is a tendency towards greater self-disclosure with those persons with whom communication is polymotivated.
My further research led me to the conclusion that a large amount of self-disclosure and intensity of communication motivation in equally serve as evidence of close, emotionally deep relationships, as they manifest themselves in communication with the most loved and valued people (mother, loved one, best friend or friend). However, this does not mean at all that the very fact of being in the role of a mother guarantees such an attitude towards her on the part of children, everything here is purely individualized.
The next series of experiments, conducted under my leadership by E.P. Panchenko, was aimed at clarifying the very motives of self-disclosure in the process of interpersonal communication. It was attended by 30 students of the 2nd year Faculty of Philology and 25 2nd year students of the psychological faculty. Two methods have been developed to diagnose self-disclosure motivation. One of them was a questionnaire aimed at clarifying the goals and motives of self-disclosure. The second technique was a modification of the MMO test described above. During its implementation, the subject was asked to first write a list of people who make up his immediate environment in the family, at the university and in the circle of friends, and then assess the extent to which different motives prompt him to tell these people about himself. To facilitate the work of the subject, the test form was accompanied by big list possible motives for self-disclosure, from which he could choose those that he considered most characteristic of himself. When processing the data, the magnitude of self-disclosure motivation was analyzed both for individual motives and in relation to different partners. In addition, a group of students of philology filled out a modified version of the S. Jurard questionnaire for diagnosing the volume and direction of their self-disclosure, mentioned above.
The next question of the questionnaire was aimed at finding out whether the motives for self-disclosure of the subjects change depending on what kind of information they provide about themselves, and what they expect from the interlocutor. The question was formulated as follows: "What do you expect from the interlocutor when you tell him: a) about your health; b) about your finances; c) about your personal problems; d) about your successes; e) about your failures; f) about their interests and beliefs?" An analysis of the answers showed that female students from two samples of subjects assess the behavior of their recipients differently. When talking about their health, 60% of philologists expect sympathy, the majority of psychologists (56%) said that they do not talk about it, and only 24% expect sympathy. In addition, philologists are waiting for advice (26%) or do not expect anything (13%), and psychologists of understanding (20%).
Reporting their financial problems, 53.3% of philologists do not expect anything from the interlocutor, 30% help, 16.6% sympathy, 52% of psychologists expect help, 24% advice, 12% sympathy and another 12% expect nothing.
When talking about their personal problems, the majority hopes for understanding from the interlocutor (66.6% of philologists and 52% of psychologists), advice (20% of philologists and 12% of psychologists). In addition, psychologists count on help (36%), and philologists on support (13.3%). Most of the subjects hope for joy in response to stories about their successes (72% of psychologists and 53.3% of philologists) or for praise (28% of psychologists and 26.7% of philologists). Philologists think that they can cause envy in the interlocutor (20%). When reporting their failures, philologists rely more on sympathy (60%), and psychologists on getting advice (68%). Other philologists are waiting for support, and psychologists for participation. When talking about their interests and beliefs, everyone first of all counts on the interest of the listener (64% each), then on response information (26% of philologists and 20% of psychologists) and, finally, on support (10% of philologists and 16% of psychologists).
The analysis of the data obtained indicates that the content of the reported information corresponds to the expected reaction of the recipient in the view of the subjects. This can serve as indirect evidence that, depending on the goals of influencing a partner, they can consciously change the content of the information provided about themselves and possibly its form (depth, detail of presentation, emotional presentation, etc.). Characteristically, in most cases, girls talk about themselves in order to get help in its various forms: emotional, moral, informational or business. This is undoubtedly due to their age. According to the data obtained by me in another study, young people are characterized by the predominance of egocentric communication motivation, which consists in the desire to receive various help from others, while for middle-aged people, the predominance of an alterocentric orientation, manifested in the desire to provide assistance, or their balance .
The data obtained using a modified version of the MMO test made it possible to identify differences in the motivation of self-disclosure of the subjects in the process of their communication with different people. In this test, the subject had to name main motive, which encourages him to tell about himself to each person from the list of his acquaintances. This made it possible to analyze on the whole group, consisting of 30 students of the Faculty of Philology, which motives are most important for them in self-disclosure with different recipients.
Table 1
The main motives of self-disclosure in communication with different people
motives/interlocutors mother father girlfriend friend psychologist companion teacher
speak out, take one's soul away 7 6 1 1
avoid feelings of loneliness 1 1 2
I am worried about my problem 3 1 1 5
get the help you need 3 5 2 1 5 5
get advice 3 4 4 10 4
like this person 13 3 2
present yourself in a certain light 1 1 4
justify in the eyes of this person 5
brag about success 1 1
establish yourself in the eyes of this person 1 1 1 1
get confirmation of the correctness of the act 5 3 6
find out the reaction to my information 1 2 1 1
in response to questions 3 3 2 8 4
so accepted 4 2 2 1
fill a gap in a conversation 2 2
flirt 3 6
entertain the interlocutor 1 3 4 1
provide moral support 3 1 1
call for frankness 1 2 4
respond to frankness 1 1
find out the relationship 3 2
As can be seen from Table 1, there are clear differences in girls' self-disclosure motivations with different people. Communication with the mother is emotionally rich in nature, in addition, they expect assessments of their behavior, advice and help from her. It is characteristic that communication with the closest friend is close in structure to communication with the mother, but at the same time they tell the girlfriend about themselves also in order to give advice. Girls tell their father about themselves much less willingly: four noted that they tell their father about themselves because "it's customary", and three "in response to questions". This testifies to the lack of trust between them and their fathers; relations. Basically, they expect help or advice from him. Help is most expected from adults: parents, a psychologist and a teacher. The girls, although they had no experience of communicating with a real psychologist-consultant, correctly understand his functions and expect him to solve their problems, help and advice in response to their frankness. Naturally, almost half of the girls noted the desire to please him as the main motive for self-disclosure in communication with their boyfriend. In communication with him, as well as with a random fellow traveler, whom the girls imagined as a potential friend, noting his age close to their own, self-disclosure rather acts as a self-presentation. They are ready to flirt with them, entertain them, although some of the respondents show restraint with a stranger. So, eight of them are ready to talk about themselves only in response to questions. Attention is drawn to the fact that with close people there is almost no motive to control the impression of oneself, it is most typical for communication with those whose sympathy still needs to be won: a familiar young man, fellow traveler, teacher. The relationship with the teacher is very special. They expect help, advice, confirmation of the correctness of their act from him, they strive to make a pleasant impression on him, they only want to justify themselves before him, but there are no attempts at emotional self-disclosure. Moreover, some respondents want to comply psychological distance between the teacher and himself and talk about himself only when necessary: in response to questions or to fill a pause.
These data indicate that girls adequately perceive the motives of their self-disclosure with different people, and probably know how to vary the information that is reported about themselves in life depending on the goals and the target to which this information is addressed. Another conclusion is that it is possible to empirically study these variations and, on their basis, create a typology of different types of self-disclosure: confidential, help-seeking, boastful, entertaining, etc. In my opinion, these features of self-disclosure are much more related to the individuality of the subject than the total indicators of its volume.
The next task of this work was to analyze the relationships between the motives and themes of self-disclosure. The pilot study using the questionnaire, the results of which were presented above, gave reason to assume that there are group-wide patterns between the presentation of certain topics and the motives that encourage it. This hypothesis was tested on a sample of 30 students of philology. Degree of representation different topics in the structure of self-disclosure was determined using the Jurard test, and the motivation for self-disclosure was determined by a modified version of the MMO test described above. The results of the correlation analysis between the data of the two methods revealed the presence of significant relationships.
First of all, attention is drawn to the fact of very high correlation coefficients between the total indicator of self-disclosure motivation and all categories of self-disclosure. This means that self-disclosure on any topic is polymotivated. The only group of motives that gave connections with all the topics of self-disclosure is the group of emotional motives. The entire previous analysis of girls' self-disclosure motives showed that these motives are leading for them. Among the topics of self-disclosure, the largest number of connections with motives was found for the category "relationships with other people". This category is central in the structure of self-disclosure; almost all other categories are associated with it, which indicates its large share in girls' stories about themselves. Based on the data obtained, it can be argued that the main motivators of self-disclosure in relationships with other people are emotional motives (r=0.56 P
Summarizing the obtained empirical data, we can draw the following conclusions.
First, there is an undoubted connection between the motivation of communication and the amount of self-disclosure in the course of it. The data indicate that the greatest amount of self-disclosure and the maximum desire for communication is observed in relation to the most emotionally close people (mother, closest friends, husband or wife). Therefore, the measurement of these indicators in family members or in a friendly couple can serve as a reliable tool for determining the degree of trust in their relationship.
Secondly, the motivation for self-disclosure of the same person can vary significantly depending on who the message is addressed to. In relation to close people, the goal is to receive emotional, moral support and a variety of assistance. In relation to outside significant persons (a friend of the opposite sex, a teacher), the motives for creating a favorable impression of oneself come to the fore. The subjects (non-psychologists) demonstrated a fairly high level of reflection on these differences, which indicates that they are quite well aware of the goals of their self-disclosure and, obviously, in everyday life they modify the same information about themselves, telling it to different people.
Thirdly, the motivation for self-disclosure is related to the theme of the story about oneself. For girls, the central group of self-disclosure motives was the group of emotional motives, which gave the largest number of connections with different topics. This does not mean that such an orientation of self-disclosure is typical for everyone. For example, for the sample of workers discussed above, most of the topics of self-disclosure turned out to be related to the cognitive orientation. This problem requires a more detailed analysis, but even now it can be assumed that a person, depending on the motivation for communication in general and the motivation for self-disclosure, in particular, selects the topic of self-disclosure.
The discussed results indicate that in solving the problem of individual differences in self-disclosure, it is necessary to shift the emphasis from its formal characteristics, such as volume and breadth, to motivational and semantic ones, which are associated with deeper personal layers. Only on the basis of the leading motives of self-disclosure can one come to the styles of self-disclosure and carry out their classification. At the same time, it is not necessary to simplify the picture, expecting that a person will behave in the same way in communication with different people. On the contrary, any person, even a child, is capable of restructuring his self-disclosure depending on who it is addressed to. Obviously, in the manner of self-disclosure of each person there are stable characteristics arising from his value orientations and personality traits, and characteristics that change depending on the situation and partner. Moreover, it can be assumed that the more developed a personality is, the more variable the picture of its self-disclosure with different people will be in the presence of sufficient integrity of behavior (freedom within boundaries). The inconsistency of information about the relationship between the amount of self-disclosure and mental health, in my opinion, is due to wrong choice indicator. After all, the total volume of self-disclosure does not say anything about its qualitative side, which creates the basis for mental health. Mental health is not associated with the magnitude of self-disclosure, but with its adequacy, which consists in a person's awareness of his own needs for self-disclosure, and then in the choice of those people and those situations that are able to satisfy these needs in the process of self-disclosure. On the threshold of the coming century, psychology must abandon simple solutions century of the present. If the psychology of the past posed dichotomous questions (personal behavior depends on the situation or on internal properties), then the psychology of the future should come to a description of a changing personality in a changing environment.
source unknown
480 rub. | 150 UAH | $7.5 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Thesis - 480 rubles, shipping 10 minutes 24 hours a day, seven days a week and holidays
240 rub. | 75 UAH | $3.75 ", MOUSEOFF, FGCOLOR, "#FFFFCC",BGCOLOR, "#393939");" onMouseOut="return nd();"> Abstract - 240 rubles, delivery 1-3 hours, from 10-19 (Moscow time), except Sunday
Zinchenko Elena Valerievna Self-disclosure and its conditionality by socio-psychological and personal factors: Dis. ... cand. psychol. Sciences: 19.00.05: Rostov n/D, 2000 256 p. RSL OD, 61:01-19/116-6
Introduction
CHAPTER I Self-disclosure of personality as a socio-psychological phenomenon 14
1.1. Theoretical analysis of ideas about self-disclosure in foreign and domestic psychology 14
1.2. The phenomenon of self-disclosure from the point of view of various socio-psychological approaches 26
1.3. Types of self-disclosure of personality in communication 40
1.4. Self-disclosure parameters and methods for their diagnostics 52
1.5. Functions and consequences of disclosure by the subject of his
inner world around. 59
CHAPTER II. Factors that determine the features of personality self-disclosure in communication 73
2.1. Socio-psychological factors of self-disclosure 74
2.2. Socially - demographic characteristics communicator as a factor of self-disclosure 80
2.3. The influence of the psychological characteristics of the subject on his self-disclosure 90
2.4. Cognitive style as a determinant of personality self-disclosure 96
CHAPTER III. Empirical study of self-disclosure and its conditioning by socio-psychological and personal factors 104
3.1. Purpose, tasks, object, methods and organization of the experiment 104
3.2. Exploring the characteristics of self-disclosure and their relationships
3.3. The influence of the social role of the recipient and the nature of interpersonal relations on the characteristics of self-disclosure in adolescence
3.4. Determining the parameters of self-disclosure by the gender of the communicator 134
3.5. Study of the influence of the communicator's cognitive style on his self-disclosure 140
Conclusion
Literature 155
Applications
Introduction to work
In the last decade, interest has increased in such a section of social psychology as the social psychology of personality. The specificity of social psychology when looking at a person lies in considering it as an interacting and communicating subject (V.N. Myasishchev, 1970, 1974, 1995; M.I. Bobneva, E.V. Shorokhova, 1979; A.A. Bodalev, 1995 ; G.M. Andreeva, 1980, 1998; L.A. Petrovskaya, 1989, etc.). One of the trends in modern social psychology is a reorientation from the study of the phenomena of perception of another person to the study of how a person manifests himself in communication with others.
The topic of personal representation of a person in communication, in line with which the phenomena of self-disclosure and self-presentation are considered, is quite well developed in foreign psychology (S. Jourard, 1958; P. Lasakow, 1958; P. Cozby, 1979; V. Derlega, 1984; J. Berg , 1986). In domestic social psychology, its place has not yet been completely determined, as evidenced even by the fact that the concept of self-disclosure is absent in most domestic psychological dictionaries, with the exception of psychotherapeutic ones, where its definition is given in relation to the specifics of the psychotherapeutic process (B.D. Karvasarsky, 1998; V. L. Minutko, 1999).
Separate studies affecting the issues under consideration appeared in Russian psychology relatively recently (T.P. Skripkina, 1984; N.V. Amyaga, 1988; I.P. Shkuratova, 1998), therefore, an unambiguous position has not yet been developed in relation to definition of self-disclosure, methodological tools for studying this psychological phenomenon have not been developed, its main characteristics and types have not been described. Of particular note is the fact that in the Russian sample, socio-psychological and personal factors of self-disclosure are practically not studied. For example, in domestic social psychology there are no works in which races
the influence of the cognitive style of the communicator, his attitude to the recipient on the process of self-disclosure would be considered; although the dependence of self-disclosure on interpersonal relationships is directly or indirectly emphasized by a number of authors (V.A. Losenkov, 1974; L.Ya. Gozman, 1987; N.V. Amyaga, 1989; I.S. Kon, 1989), and numerous data on manifestation of cognitive style in the field of communication (Y. Witkin, D. Goodenough, 1977; I.P. Shkuratova, 1994; A.L. Yuzhaninova, 1998; T.G. Antipina, 1998, etc.) give reason to assume its connection with self-disclosure.
The importance and relevance of developing the problem of self-disclosure in domestic social psychology is obvious for several reasons. First, the quantitative and qualitative components of self-disclosure are of interest as an important component of a person's behavior in the field of communication. Each historical time and each society is characterized by a special culture of self-disclosure. Modern society, one of the features of which is social instability, leads a person to an identity crisis, as well as to a global distrust of government, legal proceedings, and the media. In this regard, the attention of psychologists is increasingly turning to such subject areas as social cognition, meanings, trust, self-disclosure, etc. (G.M. Andreeva, 1998; K.A. Abulkhanova, 1999; D.A. Leontiev, 1997; T.P. Skripkina, 1998; N.V. Amyaga, 1998). The current situation indicates the inability of most people to optimally combine trust and distrust, the lack of adequate self-disclosure skills, the process of which contributes to a better understanding of their problems, clarification of uncertainty and, in this sense, helps each individual to answer the question "Who am I?"
Characteristic for modern society urbanization, computerization, development and implementation technical means mass communications change the sphere of interpersonal relations, which, in turn, is reflected in the character
tere self-disclosure. An increase in the quantitative side of contacts with a simultaneous decrease in their depth is observed (M. Heidemets, 1979; Ya.A. Davidovich, 1981; E.V. Sokolov, 1982), complication of the conditions communication, as well as an increase in the proportion of mediation in the communicative behavior of the subject (Yu.M. Zaborodin, A.N. Kharitonov, 1985; V.A. Apollonov, 1981; i E.G. Slutsky, 1981). The growing alienation of modern man leads him to the need to communicate with an unfamiliar or imaginary partner, as well as with a computer. As a result, psychology faces new practical tasks: studying the manifestation of personality in a virtual information society, highlighting the characteristics of an ideal computer personality that can replace human communication and a number of others. Reduction of personal space, accumulation negative emotions, the growth of mental tension also contribute to a change in the structure of self-disclosure of the individual.
Secondly, it is known that self-disclosure underlies most of the psychodiagnostic procedures and psychotherapy (A.S. Slutsky, V.N. Tsapkin, 1985; K. Rudestam, 1993; B.D. Karvasarsky, 1998; V.L. Minutko, 1999; V.T.Kondrashenko, D.I. Donskoy, S.A. Igumnov, 1999). It acts as a kind of channel through which the psychotherapist receives the information he needs, establishes and maintains contact with the patient; and the psychologist-researcher - with the subject (J. Berg, V. Derlega, 1986; L.B. Filonov, 1979). The study of the process of self-disclosure can help improve both psychodiagnostic and psychotherapeutic procedures, significantly increase the reliability of the socio-psychological information obtained in this way.
Thirdly, it is known that self-disclosure performs a number of important functions for the individual. It strengthens mental health, stimulates personal growth, promotes the development of self-awareness. Therefore, the study
The knowledge of self-disclosure will contribute to the study of the mechanisms of personal growth.
Fourthly, the study of the phenomenon of self-disclosure is necessary for a deeper understanding and understanding of the essence of other psychological categories, such as trust, self-expression, personal communication, dialogic communication.
In connection with the foregoing, we can conclude that by now there is a need to develop a clear scientific definition of self-disclosure, to clarify the place of this psychological category in the domestic socio-psychological theory and comprehensive study self-disclosure as a complex socio-psychological phenomenon caused by a whole group of factors in the Russian sample.
The purpose of the study: to study self-disclosure and its conditionality by socio-psychological and personal factors.
Subject of study: volume, depth, content, differentiation and selectivity self-disclosure - personality and its socio-psychological and personal determinants (the social role of the partner, the nature of interpersonal relationships, gender and cognitive style of the communicator).
Research hypotheses:
1. The volume of self-disclosure of the subject varies depending on the social role of the partner and the nature of interpersonal relations between the communicator and the recipient.
2. Cognitive style determines self-disclosure in interpersonal
communication in such a way that cognitive complexity positively affects its differentiation and selectivity, and field dependence - field independence determines its volume and content.
3. Self-disclosure of girls and boys differs in volume, depth and
The purpose of the study was specified in the following tasks:
1. To carry out a theoretical analysis of the concept of self-disclosure as a socio-psychological phenomenon.
2. Select criteria for classification and describe the main types of self-disclosure.
3. Develop a set of methods for diagnosing individual and
group features of self-disclosure in interpersonal communication.
4. To analyze the various characteristics of self-disclosure and from the relationship on the example of adolescence.
5. To establish the influence of the social "role of the recipient on the characteristics of the self-disclosure of the subject.
6. Explore the amount of self-disclosure depending on the nature of interpersonal relationships between the communicator and the recipient.
7. To carry out an empirical analysis of the influence of the gender factor on the volume, depth, content, differentiation and selectivity of self-disclosure.
8. To study the manifestation of cognitive complexity - simplicity in the characteristics of personal self-disclosure.
9. Investigate the influence of field dependence-field independence on the characteristics of self-disclosure.
Methodological and theoretical background of the study:
the principle of determinism as a regular dependence of mental phenomena on the factors that generate them (S.L. Rubinshtein, A.V. Petrovsky, M.G. Yaroshev
sky), the concept of relations V.N. Myasishchev, the idea of self-disclosure as a personal representation of a person in communication (S. Jourard, P. Lasakow, P. Cozby, V. Derlega, J. Berg), the concept of communication as a subject-subject interaction (A.A. Bodalev, G. M. Andreeva, L.A. Petrovskaya, A.U. Kharash. S.L. Bratchenko), the idea of the determination of communication by the socio-psychological characteristics of the individual (K.A. Abulkhanova-Slavskaya. A.A. Bodalev, L.I. Antsyferova), the idea of communication as a tripartite process, including perceptual, communicative and interactive aspects (G.M. Andreeva), the concept of self-expression as an external manifestation mental world subject (V.A. Labunskaya), the idea of personality as an intra-individual, inter-individual and meta-individual formation (A.V. Petrovsky, V.A. Petrovsky), the position of cognitive styles as stable differences in the organization and processing of acquired experience (M.A. Kholodnaya, I.P. Shkuratova, A.L. Yuzhaninova), the theory of personality constructs (G. Kelly), the concept of psychological differentiation (N. Witkin).
In accordance with the goals and objectives set by us, the following methods and techniques were used: 1) to diagnose the characteristics of self-disclosure - a modified version of the S. Jurard questionnaire, developed by us the questionnaire "Scales of self-disclosure" and the technique "Letter to an unfamiliar friend"; 2) to determine the field dependence-field independence - the test "Gottschald Figures"; 3) to identify the degree of cognitive complexity - J. Kelly's repertoire test.
The following methods were used for data processing: frequency, correlation and factor analysis, content analysis, the method of comparing extreme groups, methods of descriptive (total) statistics.
The reliability of the results was ensured by a variety of diagnostic procedures, a large sample size, and the use of a number of methods of mathematical statistics. The study used a computer
data analysis gram "STATGRAPHICS"
The object of the study were students aged 18 to 25 years, including 153 girls and 33 boys.
At the first stage, 186 people took part in the study, among them were students of the Russian State University (69 philologists, 43 journalists, 34 psychologists) and students of the Azov medical college- 40 people. The subject of the study at this stage was the parameters of self-disclosure and their dependence on socio-psychological factors.
At the second stage, the sample for solving the problem of the influence of personal factors on self-disclosure consisted of 85 students of the Faculty of Philology of the Russian State University, of which 64 were girls and 21 were boys.
Scientific novelty of the research
1) For the first time, an attempt was made to analyze the approaches to understanding self-disclosure existing in domestic and foreign psychology and to determine the place of this phenomenon in the system of socio-psychological categories.
2) A classification of types of self-disclosure according to various criteria is proposed and their comparative analysis is carried out; the socio-psychological and personal factors determining self-disclosure are singled out and described; the parameters of self-disclosure and methods of their diagnostics are considered.
3) A Russian-language modified version of the S. Jurard technique was tested, the possibilities of diagnosing self-disclosure parameters based on the Self-Disclosure Scale questionnaire and the Letter to an Unfamiliar Friend method were studied.
4) For the first time, extensive empirical material has been collected regarding the characteristics of self-disclosure of Russian youth. The influence of the social role of the recipient on the volume, content, depth and differentiated
ness of self-disclosure; as well as the influence of various characteristics of interpersonal relationships (“distance”, “position”, “valency”, “degree of acquaintance) / on the volume of self-disclosure.
5) For the first time, data on the influence of such cognitive-style parameters as field dependence-field independence and cognitive complexity - simplicity on the features of self-disclosure have been obtained and described.
Theoretical and practical significance of the work
The theoretical analysis carried out expands and deepens the idea of self-disclosure as a socio-psychological phenomenon. The paper clarifies the definition of self-disclosure, describes its main types and characteristics. A set of methods for diagnosing self-disclosure in interpersonal communication has been developed.
Identified differences in the characteristics of self-disclosure depending on gender, cognitive style of the communicator; the social role of the recipient and the nature of interpersonal relationships make it possible to form a more complete and differentiated idea of the features of self-disclosure in adolescence.
Data on the relationship between the parameters of self-disclosure and field dependence-field independence, cognitive complexity-simplicity testify to the important role of cognitive-stylistic characteristics of a person in his self-disclosure.
The results of the study can be used in psychological counseling, in various types of psychotherapeutic and psychocorrectional work with young people, as well as for the psychoprophylaxis of deviations in personal development. Based on the data obtained, it is possible to develop special programs socio-psychological training aimed at teaching the skills of adequate self-disclosure.
At present, the methods developed and the data obtained from
used when reading the course "General and Social Psychology" for students of the philological and philosophical faculties of the Russian State University, when reading the course "Diagnosis of individual characteristics of communication" and when conducting a workshop in the specialty for students of the full-time and part-time department of the Faculty of Psychology of the Russian State University; as well as in the work of a psychologist-consultant of the Rostov regional branch of the Russian Red Cross Society under the program "Assistance of the RRCS to internally displaced persons from Chechnya in the territory of the Russian Federation outside the conflict zone."
Provisions for defense:
1) Self-disclosure as a complex socio-psychological phenomenon is a predominantly voluntary direct or indirect communication by the subject of personal information of varying degrees of intimacy to one or more recipients.
2) The volume, depth, content and differentiation of self-disclosure are largely determined by the social role of the recipient in relation to the communicator and the nature of their interpersonal relationships. The closeness and positivity of the relationship has a positive effect on the amount of self-disclosure.
3) The volume, depth and content of self-disclosure depend on the gender of the communicator. Girls are more likely to tell others about themselves than boys; at the same time, they report their feelings and experiences, while young men - about their opinions and attitudes.
4) Cognitive complexity is manifested in high differentiation and selectivity, a shallow depth of direct and large volume mediated self-disclosure. Field dependence-field independence does not have a significant impact on the total amount of self-disclosure in direct communication, but it affects the content of indirect self-disclosure.
Approbation of work and implementation of results
materials dissertation research were presented at the session of the Week of Science of the Russian State University (1998), at the II All-Russian Conference of the RPO "Methods of Psychology" (Rostov-on-Don, 1997), at meetings of the Department of Social Psychology and Personality Psychology of the Russian State University (1995-1999).
Thesis structure
The work consists of an introduction, three chapters, a conclusion, a list of references, including 300 sources, 19 of which are in English, and appendices. The volume of the main text is 154 pages, contains 7 figures and 39 tables, including 5 figures and 33 tables in the appendices.
Theoretical analysis of ideas about self-disclosure in foreign and domestic psychology
The term "self-disclosure" (self-disclosure) was introduced into psychology by the American researcher of humanistic orientation S. Jurard, who defined it as "the process of communicating information about oneself to other people" /297, p.91/. This definition, given more than forty years ago, serves as a starting point for psychologists dealing with this issue even today, although some authors rightly point out its shortcomings: descriptive nature, some limitations, superficiality, etc. (P. Cozby, 1979; N.V. Amyaga, 1991). Attempts are being made to remedy the status quo by proposing more specific definitions of self-disclosure. At the same time, some of the psychologists prioritize the confidentiality of transmitted information. D. Myers, for example, believes that the essence of the process under consideration is "the disclosure of innermost experiences and thoughts to another person" /141, p.679/. T.P. Skripkina gives a definition that is quite consonant with the above, adding the principle of voluntariness as a criterion. She understands self-disclosure as "the act of voluntarily disclosing confidential information about one's own inner world in front of another person" /216, p.88/. Focusing on the depth and intimacy, the authors significantly narrow, in our opinion, the phenomenon under consideration.
If one adheres to S. Jurard's understanding of self-disclosure, then its degree varies from reporting demographic data about oneself to full disclosure /296/. We find a similar point of view in the psychotherapeutic approach /147, 185, 219/. A.S. Slutsky and V.N. Tsapkin, for example, defines self-disclosure as "such a patient's behavior when, in a trusting atmosphere of a group, he takes the risk of being himself, abandoning inadequate protective stereotypes... however, this does not mean that he must necessarily reveal some of his intimate secrets" / 219, p. 236 /. Consequently, in the process of self-disclosure, the subject conveys to the recipient not only the most intimate feelings, but also expresses judgments on various issues, formulates its own attitude to various objects and phenomena, etc. I.S. Kohn, in our opinion, covers all these points, considering self-disclosure as "a conscious and voluntary discovery of one's own Self, one's subjective states, secrets and intentions" /110, p.72/. However, its definition also contains a reference to the voluntariness of self-disclosure. In this regard, we will outline our position on this issue. It is based on the fact that modern man often involved in forced communication at work, in an urban environment, in family life/65, 93/.. The necessary moment of such communication is self-disclosure; therefore, we believe that the disclosure of information about oneself is not always carried out voluntarily, but can proceed under forced conditions. Based on this, the above definitions of self-disclosure for the most part do not cover the entire breadth of the process, the diversity of its aspects and manifestations.
N.V. Amyaga comprehends the phenomenon of self-disclosure from the point of view of the concept of dialogic communication, as "a manifestation of dialogue, as its condition, prerequisite, and dialogue, in turn, as a condition and as an internal characteristic of self-disclosure" /8, p.4/. If any genuine human communication is considered as a manifestation of dialogue /93/, then such a definition is quite legitimate, but not entirely specific.
In all existing definitions of the phenomenon under consideration, only the fact that during self-disclosure a person transfers to another exclusively personal information, that is, one that directly or indirectly relates to his personality, is not questioned. Here it seems to us right to turn to the point of view of the American psychologist W. James, who understands by personality the total sum of everything that a person can call his own: not only physical and spiritual qualities, but also the products of labor and social environment, home, capital and etc. /74/. And in this sense, information relating to any of these aspects, their manifestations and relationships, turns out to be personal, and, therefore, can be the essence of self-disclosure.
For a deep and detailed consideration of the phenomenon of self-disclosure, a necessary moment is to compare this concept with others that are close in meaning, psychological categories occupying strong positions in domestic and foreign psychological science. First of all, the concept of self-disclosure is closely related to the concept of self-presentation, which originated and is being developed in line with interactionism. Self-presentation or, in other words, self-presentation, self-presentation, impression management, is defined in foreign psychology as "an act of self-expression and behavior aimed at creating a favorable impression, an impression corresponding to someone's ideals" /141 , p.679/. These are various strategies and tactics that an individual uses to make a certain impression on others " / 7, 223 /. outside world, as one of the effective ways to stabilize the social self /78/. There are "self-constructing (focused on the characteristics of the ideal self) and "pleasuring" (focused on the norms existing in society) strategies of self-presentation /156/.
In psychology, a number of attempts have been made to separate the concepts of self-disclosure and self-presentation. Sometimes the difference between them is minimized to the maximum and one concept is considered as part of another. V. Derliga and J. Grzelak believe, for example, that self-presentation is a special kind of self-disclosure, only with a more careful selection of personal information /286/. B. Schlenker believes that the term "self-presentation" should be used when the subject acts to create the desired impression, and this goal is paramount for him, and the term "self-disclosure" is used when this goal is not so significant for the individual / ibid. /. N.V. Amyaga compares these two phenomena in terms of the content and purpose of the transmitted information. According to the first criterion, self-presentation is wider than self-disclosure, since it is not limited only to personal information about the subject. Whatever a person talks about, he always makes a certain impression on those around him and thereby presents himself. According to the criterion of the diversity of goals, self-disclosure is a broader concept, since its goals can be quite diverse. In addition, N.V. Amyaga notes that self-disclosure and self-presentation of a personality are correlated according to the principle of a negative linear relationship: the more self-presentation is expressed, the less self-disclosure, and vice versa 111. The choice of a subject between self-disclosure and self-presentation is often carried out taking into account the addressee, communication partner.
The phenomenon of self-disclosure from the point of view of various socio-psychological approaches
Personal self-disclosure is a necessary condition for the existence of a person in society, in the system of social ties. The reluctance to reveal oneself can lead to isolation from society /286/. With the help of self-disclosure, a person, as it were, fits into a certain social context, compares his ideas with those of others in order to further correct them. In addition to the need for the subject himself, self-disclosure is also important for those around him. Information about the individual helps them determine the situation and makes it possible to understand in advance what the partner will expect from them and what they can expect from him (E. Goffman, 1984). Self-disclosure acts as a separate socio-psychological phenomenon that requires serious and thorough study. This phenomenon and its effects have been widely used in psychotherapy for a long time, but its place in the domestic socio-psychological theory has not yet been sufficiently determined. However, in social psychology there are a number of categories through which self-disclosure can be characterized. These include communication, self-expression, impact, dialogue and others. In connection with the foregoing, the next logical step of our study is to consider self-disclosure through the prism of these concepts.
Self-disclosure as a process of communication The study of interpersonal communication is one of the fundamental psychological problems. Communication affects the formation of many characteristics of states and personality traits. It is in communication that personality is formed and manifested. With a detailed consideration of self-disclosure as a process in the neg, one can see three aspects distinguished by G.M. Andreeva in communication: communicative (exchange of information), interactive (exchange of actions) and perceptual (perception of each other by partners) /11/. Based on this idea, it turns out that in his definition of self-disclosure as the process of communicating information about oneself to others, S. Jurard touches only on the communicative side of self-disclosure, which is undoubtedly very important, but not the only one.
Since self-disclosure is necessarily based on the partners' perception of each other, the reflection of various properties and qualities, it also includes a social-perceptual component. So, in order to open up to another person, it is necessary to create his image and perceive the partner as someone who can open up. In turn, the recipient of self-disclosure must perceive the subject as someone who can be listened to. In the process of self-disclosure, the subject constantly reads the recipient's response, and the resulting image serves as a regulator of further self-disclosure, contributing to its folding or expansion, changing direction, etc. Any "failures" in the perception of each other by partners have a significant impact on the characteristics of self-disclosure: its depth, breadth, etc. The social-perceptual aspect has not been sufficiently studied in the problem of self-disclosure, although some attention is paid to the influence of the characteristics of the recipient on the course of self-disclosure in the literature.
After building images of each other, the partners move on to the communicative side of self-disclosure, which consists in the direct or indirect transmission of a message to one or more partners. It is to this side that they give most attention many authors, limiting it to the whole process of self-disclosure in communication.
In the course of self-disclosure, not only the exchange of information takes place - mutual perception, but also an exchange of actions takes place, there is a mutual influence of subjects on each other, which indicates an interactive aspect. When a person talks about himself, he makes a strong impact on others, forcing them to react to their behavior. The interaction between the participants in the process of self-disclosure can end with a joint decision, building more intimate relationships, or, conversely, a complete divergence in positions. We can talk about the success or productivity of the interaction of partners as a result of self-disclosure. If the subjects feel that the way they present themselves meets their expectations, then the interaction can be considered successful /286/. The importance of the interactive side of self-disclosure is indicated by the data of V.A. Goryanina, according to which one of the reasons for the unproductive style of interaction - the persistent predisposition of the individual to unproductive contact in interpersonal interaction, blocking the achievement of optimal results of joint activities - is distrust of people and the world as a whole, which manifests itself, among other things, in detachment from others and in an effort to hide from them their true feelings and experiences /61, 62/. Consequently, isolation in the space of one's Self, alienation from others is characteristic of a person prone to an unproductive style of interaction. On the contrary, openness leads a person to the productive realization of his potential, to building favorable interpersonal relationships.
As we noted above, an important point in self-disclosure is that in its course, one person influences another, which ultimately can change the value-semantic positions and behavior of the latter. In parallel, the personality of the subject of self-disclosure changes as well. To confirm this thesis, let us turn to the personality theory of A.V. Petrovsky.
Correlating the concepts of "personality" and "individual", he identifies three possible layers of the study of personality, which in their unity help to better understand this complex phenomenon: intra-individual, inter-individual and meta-individual /171, 172/.
The meta-individual aspect is connected directly with the problem of influence as a consequence of self-disclosure, which consists in the fact that the personality "acts as an ideal representation of the individual in other people, his otherness in them, his personalization" /171, p.230/. When considering the personality from the point of view of this aspect, the focus of attention is transferred to the impact that, consciously or unwittingly, the individual has through communication on other individuals. At the same time, the most important characteristics of the individual as a person should be sought not only in himself, but also in other people. According to A.V. Petrovsky, in this case, the analysis of the researcher can be offered two plans: the ideal representation of other people in a given personality, as well as the representation of this person as a significant "other" in the personality of other people.
Socio-psychological factors of self-disclosure
It involves the participation of at least one recipient and, therefore, is a socio-psychological process.
There are indications in the literature that the nationality and gender of the recipient have a significant impact on interpersonal communication. For example, ethnic factors regulate the spectrum acceptable ways interactions and reactions to the partner's behavior on the part of the subject entering into such interaction /128/. The nationality of the recipient largely determines the expectations of the subject in terms of the manifestation of certain character traits and ways of communication on the part of the partner /12/.
Most of the research concerning the gender of the "target" of self-disclosure was carried out as part of the study of the characteristics of male and female friendship. The first is considered more objective, strong and durable, the second is deeply emotional, but less stable. It has been experimentally confirmed that in friendly relations between women there is major degree trust and intimacy than in similar relationships between men /56, 135/. Friendly relations between female representatives are considered psychotherapeutically more valuable than friendly relations between men /273/. K. Dinelia and M. Allen recorded gender differences in self-disclosure to partners of their own and the opposite sex, the maximum self-disclosure was revealed in the self-disclosure of a woman with a woman /285/. In a conversation between two women, according to the group American psychologists, there is a greater activity of answers that fix mutual understanding, compared with a conversation between two men or a man with a woman /138/. The existence of differences in self-disclosure depending on the gender of the recipient is also confirmed by other psychologists. It was revealed, for example, that adolescents of both sexes most often choose a peer of the same sex as themselves for a frank conversation /271/. In adolescence, the situation changes, and the relationship between boys and girls becomes trusting rather than their relationship with their peers of the same sex / 149 /. In the future, young people intend to establish even more trusting friendly relations with the opposite sex, and they see their closest friend in the person of their future spouse /187/.
Not less than an important factor, influencing the intensity and content of self-disclosure, are such characteristics of a partner as his degree of kinship, social role, status. When talking about yourself, a variety of people can act as recipients: a friend, relative, doctor, and others. S. Jurard revealed that young unmarried people are more open to their mother than to their father, friend or girlfriend, and married people - to their wives /297/. A study of self-disclosure of Japanese adolescents using a questionnaire showed that girls more often solve the most important life issues with their mother, boys - with their father; As for communication with peers, boys discuss with girls those issues that they do not touch upon when talking with other partners, and girls do not make differences in topics when revealing their "I" to peers /271/. Researching the social circle of young adults, D. Pulakos showed that they feel closer to friends than to relatives. A warm relationship develops between young adults and their friends, and they often discuss many problems together. With relatives, the circle of discussion of problems is significantly narrowed, feelings become more differentiated /186/. An important role, for example, is played by the degree of kinship by father or mother. English psychologists It was experimentally established that student granddaughters develop more emotionally close relationships with maternal grandmothers than with paternal grandmothers /240/.
X. Weinberg also notes that it is sometimes easier for a person to establish a more trusting relationship with a psychoanalyst than with friends. At the same time, "unlike friendship, where everything is built on reciprocity, within the framework of an analytic relationship, reciprocity is limited, but at the same time, the patient can reveal to the analyst something that he does not admit to either his friends or himself" /41/. The process of self-disclosure is also influenced by the status characteristics of partners, for example, relations in the "boss - subordinate" system introduce significant restrictions on the self-disclosure of both.
The socio-psychological characteristics of the recipient are well studied within the framework of the problems of psychological difficulties in communication. V.A. Labunskaya identifies 5 factors that characterize the most typical "field" of difficult communication: expressive-speech characteristics, social-perceptual, types of relationships, forms of address and communication conditions /126/. In our opinion, all these factors are also present in self-disclosure. Let's try to consider them sequentially from the point of view of contributing to this process.
The expressive-speech factor of self-disclosure includes the characteristics of the recipient's speech, the degree of correspondence of his verbal and non-verbal characteristics of communication, as well as the outwardly shown partner's interest in self-disclosure of the subject acting as a communicator. According to V.A. Losenkov, it is very important that a friend be "ready to listen with interest" /135/.
The social-perceptual factor includes the ability of the recipient to assess the feelings and moods of the subject of self-disclosure, his social stereotypes and attitudes. The types of relationships include the partner's ability to empathize as an emotional response to the feelings of another person in the form of sympathy and empathy /38, 122, 241/.
Forms of appeal relate to the ability of a partner to adhere to certain norms of communication, to show empathic listening, keep up the conversation, reciprocate frankness. The ability to listen and share the feelings of another person A.I. Tashcheva calls the main characteristics of the recipient, which help to dispose the subject to a story about his own personality /225/. By showing his participation, the partner helps the communicator to reduce internal tension.
The conditions of self-disclosure include the frequency of communication with a particular person. Too frequent communication, according to N. Pokrovsky, loses its natural limitation and depth /182/. Rare communication also has its negative sides, it makes it difficult to quickly move to an intimate-personal level.
For self-disclosure, interpersonal relationships and their characteristics play a significant role: the degree of acquaintance, likes and dislikes, the degree of emotional closeness, as well as the experience of relationships with a particular person. A.L. Zhuravlev and others note the significance of the experience of pre-experimental communication in a situation of experimental study of the types of attitudes of the individual to the environment. The presence of such experience determines high assessments of oneself in terms of trusting and dependent types of attitudes, and its absence leads to an increase in distrustful and a decrease in dependent types of attitudes of a person towards others /81/. According to the theory of I. Altman and D. Taylor, as interpersonal relations between people develop, their self-disclosure becomes deeper, its breadth and duration increase. Based on the works of V.A. Labunskaya and T.A. Shkurko, which provides a complete description of the criteria for classifying the types of relationships in communication /127, 225/, it can be assumed that self-disclosure in most affect following characteristics interpersonal relationships: their sign (valence), the degree of closeness or distance between partners, the degree of their acquaintance and the position of the recipient.
Exploring the characteristics of self-disclosure and their relationships
In accordance with the first empirical task, which consists in studying the characteristics of the subject's self-disclosure and their relationship, we analyzed all categories of self-disclosure using the method of S. Jurard for 186 students of different specialties who participated in the study. To analyze the obtained data, methods of statistical processing of socio-psychological information (STATGRAPHICS package) were used, in particular, a sample mean was calculated for each of the four groups of subjects. As a result, it was found that the average value total volume self-disclosure according to the method of S. Jurard is 298.6 points. At the same time, the range of individual differences is quite wide: the minimum value is 106, and the maximum is 584 points, which indicates a high variability of the variable under study, as a result of its determination by many factors. Categories of personal information were ranked according to the degree of their representation in the self-disclosure of the subjects (see Appendix Yu).
As it turned out, the total amount of self-disclosure of doctors, psychologists, journalists and philologists is almost the same (314.7; 300.6; 304.3; 284.7 points, respectively). Consequently, students of the studied specialties as a whole do not differ among themselves in terms of the amount of self-disclosure.
As can be seen from the figure, the first block includes those categories in which the respondents disclosed the most (the total average group score of self-disclosure in the category is above 44). The highest level here is occupied by interests and hobbies. It is for this category that the indicators of self-disclosure were the highest in all the studied groups. Further, almost at the same level, with a minimal difference in points, there is information about studies, as well as opinions and attitudes. Depending on the sample, these categories occupy the second and third positions. High self-disclosure on the topic "study" is due to the fact that learning activities are leading for students.
Note that the categories included in the first block apply to a very wide circle of human communication. The information related to them does not affect the intimate aspects of the personality, the risk of the subject during its transmission is minimal. You can freely talk about these topics with absolutely all people: familiar and unfamiliar, sympathetic and not sympathetic. This allows students to open up on them to the maximum extent. The second block consists of the categories "relationships", "personality" and "troubles" as the volume of self-disclosure decreases. According to them, the individual is no longer revealed to everyone, but mainly to close people whom he trusts. The data given in table. 6 (see Appendix 11) indicate that doctors talk more about their troubles than philologists (for other groups, the difference turned out to be statistically insignificant). professional activity often become recipients of self-disclosure for a patient who talks about his ailments. Having the experience of receiving negative information, they are no longer afraid to give this kind of information about their personality. For philologists, however, such an experience is not typical.
"Finance" and "body" turned out to be the most "closed" topics related to the third block. The average self-disclosure score for these categories is below 36.7. Probably here big role for the Russian sample, cultural determinants played a role. long time in Soviet society, the desire for material well-being was strictly suppressed; a ban was imposed on the discussion of sexual relations. All this contributed to the fact that the above topics firmly occupied the last positions in the hierarchy of self-disclosure topics.
The three blocks of self-disclosure categories that we experimentally identified and the ranking of categories obtained by ranking depending on the amount of information transmitted coincided with the results of S. Jurard and P. Lazakov, who stated that "high self-disclosure" includes tastes and interests, opinions and work, and " low self-disclosure" - topics of finance, body and personality /297/. This coincidence is all the more remarkable because the research took place in different countries and at different times (Jurard conducted his research in the 60s). Therefore, it can be assumed that the ratio of the volume of self-disclosure by category is, in a certain sense, traditional for the two cultures, although the self-disclosure of Americans is determined by completely different social norms than the self-disclosure of Russians (for example, in American society it is not customary to discuss the size of their income, all questions on this topic are considered indecent).
Selected N.V. Amyaga 3 subcategories of self-disclosure topics: topics of superficial communication, topics of an average or indefinite level of intimacy, deeply intimate topics, and their place in the level of self-disclosure of high school students 111 are also fully correlated with the three blocks of self-disclosure categories we received. The same can be said about the classification of topics of confidential communication, carried out by T.P. Skripkina. According to her, topics of a high level of intimacy include information related to plans, dreams, life goals and ways to achieve them, features of family relationships; topics of the average level of intimacy - information relating to relationships with colleagues in studies, with the opposite sex, assessment of one's personality; Topics low level intimacy affect leisure activities and current learning activities /215/. In addition, data similar to ours were obtained in self-disclosure studies conducted in parallel by N.V. Shemyakina on social workers aged 25-45 /260/ and M.V. Borodina - on students of psychological and law faculties /35/.
To check the validity of the applied version of the Jurard questionnaire, a correlation analysis was carried out (according to Spearman), as a result of which a whole network of connections was obtained within the methodology of S. Jurard (see Appendix 12). Thus, self-disclosure indicators for all categories were associated both with each other and with the total volume of self-disclosure at a high level of significance. This indicates the internal consistency of test items.
The relationship between differentiation and selectivity of self-disclosure was also significant (r=0.76, P 0.01) (see Appendix 13). In other words, if an individual differentiates the topics of self-disclosure well, then he clearly separates his communication partners, taking into account their characteristics, and vice versa.
We were unable to find any relationship between the indicators of selectivity and differentiation with indicators of the volume of self-disclosure in most categories. The only exception was the category of "troubles". Based on the data obtained, with low differentiation of self-disclosure, students talk a lot about their failures, easily reveal the negative aspects of their personality (r = 0.23, Р 0.05). Thus, the low differentiation of self-disclosure is manifested in the desire to communicate one's problems to the first person you meet.
