Self-Disclosure, Perception, and the Who I Am Assignment: Comprehensive Study Notes

Self-Disclosure and the Onion Theory (Social Penetration Theory)

  • Breadth vs. depth of self-disclosure
    • Breadth = range of topics you share about yourself
    • Depth = how deeply you disclose each topic
    • If you reveal your entire academic history, you gain depth in that slice but not breadth across many areas
  • Onion metaphor and Shrek reference
    • Self-disclosure peels back like an onion; you move from outer layers to inner layers
    • Social Penetration Theory examines how far people peel back in a social circle
  • Variability by relationship type
    • People know you differently depending on whether they’re friends, family, coworkers, or a D&D group
    • Relationships generally involve gradual, not one-time verbal dumps
  • First impressions and “verbal dump” on first meetings
    • Overwhelming disclosures can turn people off or trigger withdrawal
  • Online vs. face-to-face disclosure
    • Face-to-face disclosure tends to increase breadth and depth more slowly and with more context cues
    • Online disclosure is shaped by keystroke economy and context; less rich cues
    • Online context creates a culture of disclosure (norms differ online vs in person)
  • Channel-rich vs. channel-lean communication
    • Three channels of communication begin with V: Verbal, Visual, and Vocal
    • Channel-rich: uses all three (verbal + vocal cues + visual cues)
    • Channel-lean: limited to one channel (e.g., texting relies mostly on verbal words)
  • Three modes of communication (V words)
    • Verbal: words and verbiage
    • Visual: physical presentation, appearance
    • Vocal: tone, pitch, speed of speech
  • Texting vs. in-person decoding challenges
    • Texting typically provides verbal content only; subtlety like sarcasm is harder to detect than in person
  • Norm of reciprocity in self-disclosure
    • If I disclose, you tend to disclose something of similar magnitude
    • Magnitude is not always equal (e.g., “dream to be a police officer” vs. “dad died”) but tends to be balanced
  • Cultural and gender differences in disclosure
    • Women tend to disclose more about themselves and with each other than with men
    • Individualistic cultures tend to disclose more than collectivistic cultures (e.g., USA vs. collectivist societies like some parts of Asia)
    • In some post-Soviet contexts, collectivist roots linger despite movements toward independence
  • Benefits of self-disclosure
    • Enhances relationships, builds trust, fosters reciprocity, emotional release, and can help others
  • Risks of self-disclosure
    • Rejection, obligation on the other person, potential harm to others, invasion of privacy, gossip
  • Gossip: definition and caution
    • Sharing of someone’s personal information with a third party without consent
  • Online disinhibition effect and post-cyber disclosure panic
    • Disinhibition online leads to braver (more extreme) disclosures
    • Post-cyber disclosure panic: fear or regret after posting, worry about being caught or judged
  • Post-cyber and fear integration
    • Panic can be layered with guilt, moral judgments, or additional anxiety
    • Panic can be driven by fear, but often amplified by other emotions (e.g., guilt, shame, ethics concerns)
  • Simon Sinek exercise and reflected appraisal
    • Ask friends: “Why are we friends?”
    • The answer often points to what you give the world (your “why”) and how you make others feel when describing you
    • Family descriptions are more challenging; you may need different prompts or approaches
  • “Who I am” assignment overview
    • Purpose: robust, introspective look at self as influenced by others
    • Not a genealogy project; focus on present relationships and lineage as context
    • Family can include non-blood ties (close friends, mentors, chosen family)
    • Concept of reflected appraisal: how others’ views shape self-perception
    • Personal interviews: use family and friends; gather their descriptions of you
    • Assignment format: three pages, with a title page, contents, and references
    • Use personal interviews as sources (APA-style in-text citations for personal communications; not in references list)
    • Interviews are framed as personal communication; do not require formal references but must be cited in-text
    • Instructor’s emphasis: content and application of class concepts over strict formatting; follow APA guidelines for structure
  • Interview guidance and questions
    • Primary questions (six):
      1) Who are you? How do you define that?
      2) How did your friends and family describe you?
      3) Did this research change your perspective on yourself?
      4) Which friend or family member were you surprised by their description?
      5) Was there someone in your family history others say you remind them of? Why?
      6) What new conclusions have you come to about yourself after speaking with others?
    • Suggested approach: include introspection and link to class theories; connect friends’ descriptions to self-concept and to concepts from the course (e.g., self-disclosure, social penetration, attribution)
    • Presentation: students present three of the six questions; the paper must address all six
  • Formatting and citation guidance (APA focus)
    • Purdue OWL (online writing lab) cited as the gold standard for APA formatting
    • Use APA formatting for references and in-text citations when citing sources (including PowerPoint slides if used as sources)
    • Personal interviews are treated as personal communication; in-text citation only: (Name, personal communication, Date)
    • Personal communications do not appear on the reference list
    • If citing a direct quote from a personal communication, include the quote within the text and cite with the date
    • For sources like PowerPoint slides or lecture notes, treat as personal or electronic sources with proper APA reference formatting when appropriate
    • Sample APA paper on Purdue Owl provides concrete examples for formatting and citations
  • How to connect course concepts to your paper
    • Tie your self-concept to established theories: Social Penetration Theory, norms of reciprocity, perceptions, attribution (self-serving bias, fundamental attribution error), stereotype and bias concepts, perceptual sets, and cognitive biases
    • Use real examples from interviews to illustrate concepts (e.g., a friend’s description that reveals your “why” or a perception check that diverges from your self-view)
    • Use both direct quotes (with personal communication citation) and paraphrase; ensure every claim about someone else’s view is properly attributed
  • Perception and interpersonal perception (recap of key concepts)
    • Perception as sense-making and reality construction; our reality is shaped by our perceptions, not an objective universal truth
    • Interpersonal perception focuses on one-on-one interactions; includes stages and processes that unfold rapidly
  • Stages of perception (microseconds, then analysis)
    • Selection: attending to stimuli; cues like eye contact, direction, facial expressions
    • Organization: categorizing information into schemas/MCDs; physical, role-related, interactional, psychological files
    • Interpretation: assigning meaning to the selected and organized information
  • Schema and MCDs (membership categorization devices)
    • Brain as a filing cabinet with drawers for physical constructs, role constructs, interaction constructs, and psychological constructs
    • MCDs help categorize people quickly; example: attractiveness, occupation, behavior tendencies
    • Category-bound activities: certain actions are bound to specific categories (e.g., issuing a ticket is a police activity)
    • Distinction: MCDs vs category-bound activities; MCDs are broad categorization tools; category-bound activities are actions tied to a specific role
  • In-group, out-group, and co-cultures
    • Co-cultures: groups who share specific values, customs, norms (e.g., professor, glasses wearers, civil war reenactors)
    • In-group vs. out-group dynamics can influence perception and bias
  • Stereotyping and memory biases
    • Stereotyping is not inherently bad but dangerous when it guides decisions and leads to biased actions
    • Selective memory bias: tendency to remember information that confirms stereotypes while forgetting contrary information
    • Weaponized ignorance: willful ignoring of information that contradicts one’s beliefs; used to reinforce biases
  • Attribution theory and biases
    • Locus, stability, controllability: internal vs. external explanations, stability of the trait, and controllability of the behavior
    • Self-serving bias: attributing one’s own successes to internal factors and failures to external factors
    • Fundamental attribution error: attributing others’ actions to internal traits rather than external circumstances (e.g., cutting someone off while driving)
  • Practical applications for perception and communication
    • Be aware of your own biases and stereotypes; challenge your perceptual set
    • Use perceptual checks (direct and indirect) to verify impressions
    • Generate alternative perspectives to revise initial judgments
    • Recognize context and culture when interpreting others’ behavior
  • Everyday takeaways and mindful practice
    • Context matters: primacy vs. recency effects influence first and last impressions
    • Ego-centrism can hinder understanding others’ perspectives; practice empathy
    • Positive vs. negative biases influence how we view people and situations (honeymoon phase vs. later interactions in relationships)
    • Perception is a skill: develop by actively seeking alternate viewpoints and engaging in reflective practice
  • Logistics and class logistics recap
    • Paper due dates and submission: APA-formatted, three pages minimum with title/contents/references; five-page maximum guidance
    • Presenter notes: 5-minute limit; notes allowed; slides/handouts optional; focus on content, not perfection of formatting
    • Shared resources: Purdue OWL for APA guidelines; sample APA paper; how to cite interviews and personal communications
    • If emailing or requesting information (e.g., drafts), expect a reasonable response window; instructor may provide direct contact info beyond campus email
  • Quick study prompts to prepare for exam
    • Explain Social Penetration Theory and onion metaphor; give examples of breadth vs. depth in different relationships
    • Compare face-to-face vs. online disclosure; give examples of channel-rich vs. channel-lean communication
    • Define norm of reciprocity and provide a real-life disclosure example
    • List and explain the six questions for the “Who I Am” assignment; explain how to incorporate class theories into the paper
    • Distinguish MCDs from category-bound activities with examples (journalist with mic/camera vs. doctor writing a script)
    • Describe the stages of perception (selection, organization, interpretation) and the brain-as-filing-cabinet analogy
    • Define and give examples of attribution biases (self-serving bias, fundamental attribution error) and perceptual biases (primacy/recency, perceptual set, ego-centrism, positivity/negativity)
    • Outline how to perform direct and indirect perception checks in conversations
  • Note on academic tone and integrity
    • Attribute ideas appropriately; use personal interviews as a primary source with in-text citations; avoid misrepresenting others’ views
    • Ground your reflections in course concepts rather than anecdotal statements alone
  • End reminder
    • The goal is to connect your personal experiences with the theoretical concepts covered in class and articulate how those concepts manifest in everyday communication and perception