PROS Sumardjono P, Adhi KM Agustin Self Disclosure and Assertive fulltext.o

(1)

Self Disclosure and Assertive Behavior Characteristics Among Counseling Students at Satya Wacana University

Sumardjono Padmomartono Adhi Krisna Maria Agustin

Guidance and Counseling Study Program, Satya Wacana Christian University sumardionopm(5)staff. uksw.edu

ABSTRACT

This article describes self-disclosure characteristics among 83 guidance and counseling students in the areas of their living concerns, namely: 1) 69, 9% students have opened about their beliefs, thoughts and emotions on religion/ spirituality. 2) 68, 7% students are self- disclosing about their interests, their likes, including views, feelings, and appreciation of a person, place or thing. 3) 63, 9% students are frequently eager to reveal private truth about themselves, are honest and seeking others to know them better. 4) 54,2% students are frequently reveal their intimate matters such as sex and willingly discuss their sexual needs and views as well as 22,9% high self-disclosing students who have shared themselves fully and in details of their intimate matters. 5) 53,0% students have opened their thought and feelings about their relationships with their friends as well as 30,1% high self-disclosing students who have opened themselves in details and have the tendency to let themselves to be known in their relationships. Within students assertive behavior: 1) 54,2% students is categorized as high aggressive behavior, only the behavior of 26,5% students, is categorized as very low as well as low aggressive behavior. 2) 51, 8% students are categorized having low non-assertive behavior, whereas only 8, 4% students are categorized having very low non-assertive behavior.

Keywords; self-disclosure, assertive behavior, psychological well-being

Introduction

Jourard integrated self-disclosure with the concepts of self, mental health and communication, defining the "self" as the person's subjective side, his thoughts, feelings, beliefs and wants, emphasizing the importance of self-disclosure, or letting another person knows what one thinks, feels and wants as the most direct means of realistically knowing one's self and thereby achieving a healthy personality integration. Jourard's thesis suggests the degree of self-disclosure to significant others as important for psychological well-being

(Jourard, 1959) A

Ifdil (2013) wrote that communication will be more effective whenever individuals are capable and eager to express their ideas and feelings openly and smoothly. This personal capabilities and eagerness were defined as self- disclosure. Furthermore, Ifdil

(2)

(2013) mentioned self-disclosure is to be developed continuously by counseling students in order to facilitate their preparation as counselors. Besides, students' ability to perform self- disclosure had an important contribution in achieving their academic success and effective social interactions.

Alberti and Emmons (1982) viewed assertiveness as a skill and capacity in interpersonal communications. Assertiveness improves students' assertive beliefs and behaviors, which help them to change the way they view themselves and to establish self- confidence, interpersonal communication and well-being (Hafshejani, Fatehizade, and Vousefi, 2013). Assertive people feel free to express their feelings, thoughts and desires. They are also able to initiate and maintain comfortable relationships with other people. They know their rights and have control over their anger. However, this does not mean that they repress feelings; instead they can control anger and talk about their feelings in a reasoning manner. Assertive people are willing to compromise with others, rather than always wanting their own way, and also they tend to have good self-esteem.

Review of Related Literature Self-disclosure

Self-disclosure was defined by Sidney Jourard (1964), as "letting another person know what you think, feel, or want". Self-disclosure can be defined as intimate and/or personal information disclosed by individuals concerning their past, present, or future that is not readily available to anyone. A prime example of self-disclosure is when two people are getting to know each other and the information communicated between them contains facts or stories that are not readily available to others. Espana (2013) noted that the purpose of self-disclosure in face-to-face communication is to exchange pieces of intimate information about the self in order to further understand and get to know another in the hope of formulating a relationship. The level and depth of self-disclosure between individuals take place in a day, a week, a month, or even longer, depending on the individual situation.

(3)

private nature of the information that distinguishes this sort of self-disclosure as a secret". Through self-disclosure individuals let themselves are known to the other person. Self- disclosure "reduces the mystery" between people (Jourard 1971a).

Billeter (2002) mentioned self-disclosure dimensions that have the strongest positive correlation to relationship satisfaction are "disclosing one's feelings towards partner." Being able to talk about the "feelings about the future of the relationship" is related to being satisfied with the relationship. Another dimension was "one's feelings about money and work." Given that the items in this dimension would seem on the surface to be less intimate and thus easier to disclose, it was somewhat surprising that this item had such a strong effect. For example, "disclosing feelings about partner's college major" and another was "disclosing how the respondents feel about their own college major."

Fisher and Choi (2013) stated that several variables have been studied in relation to self-disclosure. A great deal of self-disclosure literature has focused on determining the level of self-disclosure based on the topic of information. Adolescents who choose certain topics as low-to moderate-intimacy talk about those topics with more detail than topics that are highly intimate. While students may be unwilling to seek out a counselor to discuss personal problems, they may be more willing to do so when the problem is related to academics. Further research has shown that those who possess an agreeableness trait and who are socially skilled tend to be seen as high elicitors of self-disclosure. Women who disclose information more readily are seen as more well-adjusted than women who do not disclose - with tow disclosure in men indicating better adjustment than high disclosing men. Also, women tend to rate themselves higher as elicitors of self-disclosure based on their interactions with new people or strangers; whereas men's ratings were based on past interactions with people they were close to.

Collins and Miller (1994, in Fisher and Choi, 2013) suggest that the level of disclosure to the recipient is partly determined by how well-liked the recipient is and how much intimate disclosure they themselves take part in. While individuals choose to self-disclose for a variety of reasons, their impression of the recipient must also be taken into account; this can include the recipient's outward physical display (e.g., being seen as "closed off" vs. "open-to-talk"), the status of the recipient in relation to the discloser and the outcome of past self-disclosure instances with the recipient.

(4)

Magno, Cuason and Figueroa (Nov 07, 2008) cited Jourard statements that persons need to self-disclose to get in touch with their real-selves, to have intimate relationships with people, to bond with others, in pursuit of the truth of one's being. The consequences that follow after self-disclosure are manifested on its outcomes. The outcomes are; (1) We learn the extent to which we are similar, one to the other, and to the extent to which we differ from one another in thoughts, feelings, hopes and reactions to the past. (2) We learn of the other man's needs, enabling them to help him or to ensure that his needs will not be met. (3) We learn the extent to which a man accords with or deviates from moral and ethical standards.

In a survey that Magno, Cuason and Figueroa (Nov 07, 2008) conducted, a person after disclosing feels better (42.2%), happy (8.26%), free (B.51%), fine (4.6%), relaxed (3.67%), peaceful (3.67%), okay (3.67%), lighter (2.75%), calm (2.75%), great (1.83%), satisfied (1.83%), nothing (6.42%), and others (12.88%). Furthermore, it was reported that on being transparent or open, individuals feel relieved that a burden was taken off their shoulders; they experience peace of mind, and consequently happiness, contact with their real- selves, and better able to direct their destiny on the basis of knowledge.

Assertive Behavior

Alberti and Emmons (1982) said assertiveness promotes equality in human relationships, enabling us to act in our own best interests, to stand up for ourselves without undue anxiety, to express feelings honestly and comfortably, to exercise personal rights without denying the rights of others. Some assertiveness skills include the ability to make your own decisions about career, relationships, lifestyle and time schedule, taking initiative in starting conversation, trusting your own judgment, setting goals and achieving them, asking help from others, saying "no", setting limits on time and energy, expressing opinions and defending them, ability to disagree, express agreement or support, show affection and friendship, to respond to violations of one's rights, and expressing the above without fear of unfair criticism from others, without hurtful behavior toward others, without name-calling and intimidation, without manipulation and controlling others.

(5)

that maximally facilitates communication and that indicates respect for the other person. It is direct, honest and appropriate expression of one's feelings, opinions and beliefs. Assertive behavior does not allow for violation of another's rights either. It is a way of standing up for your rights without denying the rights of others. Whereas, non-assertive behavior allows your personal rights to be violated in one of two ways: a) You violate your own rights by inhibiting the honest expression of feelings and needs or, b) You allow someone else to infringe upon your rights. For example, when asked at what kind of restaurant you would like to eat, if you respond that it makes no difference, when it actually does, you are violating your own right to have and state a preference. Non-assertive behavior does not feel good, although it may feel safe. A nonassertive person will often feel used, hurt, anxious or angry.

Aggressive behavior is when a person stands up for his or her rights in such a way that the rights of another are violated. The motivation for aggressive behavior is to not only achieve individual rights but to dominate, humiliate or "put down" the other person. Aggression is an attack on another person, not an attack on his or her behavior. Often aggressive behavior is a result of stored-up bad feelings. Stating bad feelings as they occur can be assertive. Attacking and making someone else responsible for your bad feelings is aggression.

Here are examples of assertive, aggressive and non-assertive responses borrowed from "Your Perfect Right" by Alberti and Emmons (1974). These should help us understand the distinctions between the three ways of responding.

"Dining Out"

Mr. and Mrs. A. are at dinner in a moderately expensive restaurant. Mr. A. has ordered a rare steak, but when the steak is served, Mr. A. finds it to be very well done, contrary to his order. His behavior is;

Non-assertive: Mr, A. grumbles to his wife about the "burned" meat, and observes that he won't patronize this restaurant in the future. He says nothing to the waitress, responding "Fine!" to her inquiry "Is every- thing all right?" His dinner and evening are highly unsatisfactory, and he feels guilty for having taken no action. Mr. A's estimate of himself, and Mrs. A's estimate of him are both deflated by the experience. Aggressive; Mr. A. angrily summons the waitress to his table. He berates her * loudlyand unfairly for not complying with his order. His actions ridicule the waitress and embarrass Mrs. A. He demands and receives another steak, this one more to his liking. He feels in control of the situation, but Mrs. A's embarrassment creates friction between them, and spoils their evening. The waitress is humiliated and angry and loses her poise for the rest of the evening.

(6)

Assertive: Mr. A. motions the waitress to his table. Noting that he had ordered a rare steak, he shows her the well done meat, asking politely but firmly that it be returned to the kitchen and replaced with the rare-cooked steak he originally requested. The waitress apologizes for the error, and shortly returns with a rare steak. The A's enjoy dinner, tip accordingly, and Mr. A. feels satisfaction with himself. The waitress is pleased with a satisfied customer and an adequate tip.

Methods

A total of 83 Guidance and Counseling students of Satya Wacana Salatiga completed the 50 items taken from the Self-Disclosure Scale developed by Magno, Cuason and Figueroa (Nov 07, 2008). The scale contains five factors extracted in the principal components analysis, namely: beliefs, relationships, personal matters, intimate matters and interests. Students also completed the 35 items of The Assertiveness Inventory designed by Albert! and Emmons.

Results

Self-Disclosure

Factor 1 contains 10 items about the beliefs on religion, and ideas on a particular topic and it is labeled as Beliefs. Beliefs cover religion, defined in self-disclosure as the ability of an individual to share his thoughts and emotions toward his beliefs about God, conveying spiritual direction.

Table 1. Areas of Self-Disclosure: Category of Beliefs Category Score Range Frequency Percentages Low Frequency 17-25

Average Frequency 26 - 35 Fiigh Frequency 36-45 Total

Minimum Score = 17 Maximum Score = 45

36-45

10 12,0% 58 69,9% 15 18,1% 83 100%

Range = 28 Mean = 31.10

(7)

Factor 2 contains 10 items reflecting relationships with friends, was labeled as relationships. Interpersonal relationship is defined as the range of relationships or bonding formed within the outside the family, include peers, friends, and casual acquaintances. Jourard (1971) proposed disclosure of relatively intimate information indicates movement towards greater intimacy in interpersonal relationships. It is indicated self-disclosure illuminate the process of developing relationship.

Table 2. Areas of Self-Disclosure: Category of Relationships Category Score

Low Frequency 18-26 14 16,9%

Average Frequency 27-35 44 53,0%

High Frequency 36-44 25 30,1%

Total 83 100%

Minimum Score = 18 Range = 26

Maximum Score = 44 Mean = 31.92

Examining Table 2., almost 44 students (53,0%) have opened their thought and feelings about their relationships with their friends as well as 25 high self-disclosing students (30,1%) who have opened and shared themselves fully and in complete details to others in the area of relationships.

Factor 3 contains 10 items about a person's secrets and attitudes and most of the items contain personal matters so it was labeled as Personal Matters.

Table 3. Areas of Self-Disclosure: Category of Personal Matters Category Score Range Frequency Percentages

Total 83 100%

Minimum Score = ] L5 Range = 29 Maximum Score = 44 Mean = 28.13

Concerning Table 3. most participants (53 students/63,9%) are frequently eager to reveal private truth about themselves, favorable or unfavorable, toward something or someone and is exhibited in their though, feelings or intended behavior, students are honest and seeking others to know them better by disclosing. However, there are 21 low disclosing

(8)

students (25, 3%) who never or rarely open up themselves toward others in the area of personal matters.

Factor 4 contains feelings about oneself, problems, love, success, and frustrations, so it was labeled as Intimate Matters. One of the most intimate topics as a content in self- disclosure is sex that is usually embarrassing and hard to open to others. Maningas (1995) stated sexuality is part of our natural capacity to relate to others, giving the necessary qualities of sensitivity, warmth, mental respect in our interpersonal relationship and openness.

Table 4. Areas of Self-Disclosure: Category of Intimate Matters Category Score Range Frequency Percentages

Total 83 100%

Maximum Score =43 Mean = 29.93

Table 4. Shows most participants (45 students/54, 2%) are frequently reveal their intimate matters such as sex; they are willingly discussed their sexual needs and views. There are 19 high self-disclosing students (22, 9%) who have opened and shared themselves fully and in complete details to others in the area of intimate matters. These students will have the tendency to let themselves to be known in their intimate matters. There are also 19 low disclosing students (22, 9%) who rarely open up themselves toward others in the area of personal matters.

Factor 5 is a cluster of taste and perceptions so it was labeled as interests. Interests were labeled as likes and dislikes of a person opened to other people, including views, feelings, and appreciation of a person, place or thing.

Table 5. Areas of Self-Disclosure: Category of Interests Category Score Range Frequency Percentages

Total 83 100%

(9)

Category Score Range Frequency Percentages

iMaximum Score =46 Mean = 27.99

Table 5. Indicates an estimate of 57 students (68, 7%) is self-disclosing their interests concerning likes and dislikes, including views, feeling, and appreciation of a person, place or thing. In addition, there are 15 low disclosing students (18, 1%) who rarely open up themselves toward others in the area of interests.

Assertive Behavior

Assertive people are characteristically described as being open, flexible, self- enhancing, expressive, independent, interpersonally comfortable and genuinely concerned with the rights of others (Alberti and Emmons, 1974).

Table 6. Assertiveness; Category of Nonassertive Behavior Category Score Range Frequency Percentages Very Low Nonassertive Behavior 18-28 7 8,4% Low Nonassertive Behavior 29-40 43 51,8% High Nonassertive Behavior 41-52 25 30,1% Very High Nonassertive Behavior 53-64 8 9,6%

Total 83 100%

Referring to label 6. there are 43 students (51,8%) categorized having low nonassertive behavior, whereas only 7 students (8,4%) having very low nonassertive behavior. This result shows that most students are non-assertive, meaning that they inhibit their honest, spontaneous reactions and typically feel hurt, anxious and sometimes angry as a result of being non-assertive in various interpersonal situations. Often, they relive the situation in their minds pretending how they would do things differently if it happened again.

(10)

behavior humiliates, dominates, or puts the person down rather than simply expressing one's own emotions or thoughts. It is an attack on the person rather than on the person's behavior. Aggressive behavior is quite frequently a hostile over-reaction or outburst, which results from

past pent-up anger.

Table 7. Assertiveness: Category of Aggressive Behavior Category Score Range Frequency Percentages Very Low Aggressive Behavior 9-14 6 7,2%

Low Aggressive Behavior 15-20 16 19,3% High Aggressive Behavior 21-26 45 54,2% Very High Aggressive Behavior 27-32 16 19,3%

Total 83 100%

From Table 7. Can be concluded the behavior of 45 students (54, 2%), is categorized as high aggressive behavior. Only the behavior of 22 students (26, 5%), is categorized as very low as well as low aggressive behavior. Whereas, Alberti and Emmons (1982) stated that assertive behavior differs from aggressive behavior in the intent, effect, and social context in which it is perceived. When a person's intent is perceived as trying to hurt or manipulate the receiver with his or her ideas, opinions and feelings rather than to simply express them, the behavior is aggressive. The effect of the assertion is based upon the receiver's reaction to the assertion. When the assertion is positively accepted, the behavior is deemed assertive but when the person takes offense to the assertion, it is judged as aggressive. Finally, only when the behavior meets the expectations of the culture and is appropriate in social context is it considered to be assertive behavior. Culturally, inappropriate assertions are most frequently seen as aggressions.

Summary

(11)

beliefs, thoughts and emotions on religion/spirituality. 2) An estimate of 57 students (68,7%) are self-disclosing about their interests, their likes, including views, feelings, appreciation of a person, place or thing. 3) Just about 53 students (63,9%) are frequently eager to reveal private truth about themselves, are honest and seeking others to know them better. 4) Around 45 students (54,2%) are frequently reveal their intimate matters such as sex and willingly discuss their sexual needs and views as well as 19 high self-disclosing students (22,9%) who have shared themselves fully and in details of their intimate matters. 5) Almost 44 students (53,0%) have opened their thought and feelings about their relationships with their friends as well as 25 high self-disclosing students (30,1%) who have opened themselves in details and have the tendency to let themselves to be known in their relationships.

Within students assertiveness: 1) More or less the behavior of 45 students (54,2%), is categorized as high aggressive behavior, only the behavior of 22 students (26,5%), is categorized as very low as well as low aggressive behavior. 2) Nearly 43 students (51,8%) are categorized having low nonassertive behavior, whereas only 7 students (8,4%) are categorized having very low nonassertive behavior.

References

Alberti, Robert E. and Emmons, Michael T. 1974. Your Perfect Right. San Luis Obispo, Ca. Impact Press.

. 1982. Your Perfect Right: A Guide to Assertive Living. San Luis Obsipo: Human Sciences Press.

. 2001. The Assertiveness Inventory. Office of Health Education and Promotion, Health Services. Http://www.unh.edu/health-services. Accessed April 29, 2015.

Billeter, Courtney Bly. 2002. An Exploration of Eight Dimensions of Self-Disclosure with Relationship Satisfaction. Thesis. Masters of Science in Sociology. Faculty of the Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University. Blacksburg, Virginia.

Espaha, Andrew Christopher, "Self-Disclosure and Self-Efficacy in Online Dating" (2013). Dissertations and Theses. Portland State University. Dept. of Communication. Http://pdxscholar.library.pdx.edu/open_ access_etds/889. Accessed April 23, 2015. Fisher, Nicole and Choi, Seong In. 2013. What Are College Students Afraid of Disclosing and , to Whom? An Adaptation and Extension of the Self-Disclosure Index. Journal of Asia Pacific Counseling @ 2013 The Korean Counseling Association. 2013, Vol. 3, No.2, 113-130.

Jourard, Sidney M. 1959. "Healthy Personality and Self-Disclosure. "Mental Hygiene. 43 (October): 499-507.

(12)

. 1971a. The Transparent Self. New York: Van Nostrand.

. 1971b. Self-Disclosure: An Experimental Analysis of the Transparent Self. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Ifdil. 2013. Konsep Dasar Self-disclosure dan Pentingnya Bagi Mahasiswa Bimbingan dan Konseling. Pedagogi, Jurnol llmioh llmu Pendidikan, Volume XIII No.l April 2013. Hafshejani, Zohreh Amani, Fatehizade, Maryam and Yousefi, Zahra. 2013. The multiple

relations between attachment styles and big five personality traits with assertiveness in a sample of Iranian girl. Journal of Education Research and Behavioral Sciences Vol. 2(10), pp. 161-166, October, 2013. Available online at http://www.apexiournal.ore. Accessed April 29, 2015.

Leopard, Judy and Wachowiaks, Dale. November 2003. The Clearinghouse for Structured Thematic Groups and Innovative Programs. Austin; Counseling and Mental Health Center - The University of Texas at Austin.

Magno, Carlo, Cuason, Sherwin and Figueroa, Christine. Nov 07, 2008. The Development of the Self-disclosure Scale. Manila: De La Salle University.