When Silence Hurts - Term Paper Example

When Silence Hurts: Self-Disclosure Problems in Romantic Relationships due to Poor Content and Accuracy of Interaction and Anticipation of Negative Responses Name University March 9, 2015 Silence may be helpful in reducing tension during times of conflict for interpersonal relationships, but extended silence can hurt the latter in the long run too. The quantity and quality of interpersonal communication can shape relationship satisfaction; subsequently, silence is not always an effective response to communication and relationship issues and may even damage happiness in relationships (Kito, 2005; Hubbard, Aune, & Lee, 2009). An important element of successful interpersonal relationships is self-disclosure, which refers to the intentional, usually verbal, expression, of personal feelings and ideas (Farber & Sohn, 2007, p.26). Romantic relationships, in particular, need frequent talks (Määttä & Uusiautti, 2013, p.34) that include self-disclosure, in order to develop a lasting, strong relationship and to resolve relational conflicts (Jorgensen & Gaudy, 1980, p.282; Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.18). This case study concerns a married couple, Gino and Annie (not their real names) who are both conservative Christian Chinese Americans and relatives of this student researcher. They are married for three years and do not have children yet by choice. Gino is an engineer in the U.S. Army, while Annie is a stay-at-home wife and works as a freelance writer. Their main issues are self-disclosure and relationship quality. These issues are important because self-disclosure can affect relationship quality and relationship quality can impact the duration and happiness of interpersonal relationships (Jorgensen & Gaudy, 1980; Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008; Määttä & Uusiautti, 2013). Annie wants to be more autonomous as a decision-maker by starting a new career in an insurance company. She has not yet disclosed her true feelings and goals in life to her husband yet, despite being together most of the time, because of her fear of rejection and negative responses. Annie also dreads that her autonomy will be a large dent to their happy marriage. The Disclosure Decision Making Model (DDMM; Greene, 2008) and the Interpersonal Process Model of Intimacy (IPMI; Reis & Shaver, 1988) can help understand and resolve this couple’s interpersonal communication problems. The DDMM asserts that the essential components of a disclosure decision are intimacy and anticipated response to self-disclosure. The IPMI agrees that intimacy and partner response are fundamental to partner self-disclosure (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, pp.5, 7). Romantic relationships tend to have higher self-disclosure than platonic relationships, but the former can still suffer from self-disclosure problems when the content and accuracy of interaction do not match the couple’s high level of interaction, due to the non-disclosing partner’s anticipation of negative response from the recipient and fear of how this feedback can shape relationship satisfaction. The DDMM is significant to this case because it specifically illustrates how people make decisions regarding self-disclosure, which is functional in understanding disclosure decisions for married couples (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.4). This theory asserts that a disclosure decision considers the potential receiver, specifically, the speaker’s relational quality with the recipient and the predicted response of the latter to disclosure (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.4). Disclosure entails risk and vulnerability, so people in romantic relationships deliberate their disclosure decisions and tend to disclose more to one another than those in platonic relationships (Kito, 2005, p.130). At the same time, gender and culture can impact self-disclosure, wherein women tend to self-disclose more than men, while some cultures do not find self-disclosure as important, depending on one’s gender, socioeconomic position, and social roles and responsibilities (Zane & Ku, 2014). The DDMM is essential in resolving the communication issues of Gino and Annie because it provides a framework by which to analyze Annie’s self-disclosure decision making model. The DDMM, moreover, shows that relational quality is high for the concerned couple, when their level of interaction is considered. Gino and Annie have a “wealth of interaction” based on the number and length of their conversations and the diversity of communication tools and strategies they commonly use (Määttä & Uusiautti, 2013, p.36). Annie shares that, before she realized that she wanted to work instead of staying at home, she and her husband had strong interpersonal communication because of the frequency and length of their talks. She stresses that they are almost always together. Her husband serves in the Army and is not assigned at dangerous places so far, so she regularly accompanies him. They often have time to speak together too because Gino is an engineer, so he frequently goes home to his wife who lives in the camp where he works. If Gino is away for a long time, they communicate nearly every day through phone calls, video calls, or online messaging. Annie says that she feels that their level of interaction is sufficient to build a strong foundation for an intimate interpersonal communication. Though Annie discloses to her husband through their level of interaction, the content and accuracy of their interaction are decreasing in time due to self-disclosure and relationship quality issues. The content of interaction pertains to the quality and kind of couple interactions, including spouses’ ability to correctly understand each other’s messages (Määttä & Uusiautti, 2013, p.37). Annie believes that she has a problem in self-disclosure because Gino can sometimes lack empathy when she shares her goal of autonomy. He does not want her to work anymore because he wants her to focus on their future family someday. She thinks that he misinterprets her desire to work as a way of weakening their relationship. Annie believes that her self-disclosure will lead to negative reactions that may soon affect the quality of their relationship. Though Annie is aware of her self-disclosure problems, she needs to also understand that she has to improve the accuracy of her messages. Accuracy refers to the capability to communicate clearly and to interpret others correctly (Määttä & Uusiautti, 2013, p.39). She could be over-analyzing her husband’s reluctance for her to work. At the same time, Annie practices silence instead of self-disclosure, and this is not helpful in accurately sending her message to Gino. Proper verbal and nonverbal communications are important parts of self-disclosure that can relieve anticipated negative reactions from Gino by improving the accuracy of her messages (Määttä & Uusiautti, 2013, p.43). Another relevant theory to this case is the IPMI because it underscores the salience of partner responsiveness to self-disclosure in achieving positive relational effects (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). The four main parts of the IPMI are self-disclosure, partner-disclosure, partner responsiveness, and intimacy. Self and partner disclosure can include facts, emotions, and thoughts that are disclosed to their partners (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). Partner responsiveness illustrates the extent to which the discloser believes that the target recipient understands, accepts, and cares for the disclosure (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). Intimacy, also called relationship quality, represents the “closeness or connectedness” between partners (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). The IPMI theory is helpful in understanding disclosure decisions and offering ways to improve self-disclosure. Annie believes that partner responsiveness is low, but she has not even tested it yet. She fears loss in couple closeness after self-disclosure, but her silence itself is diluting their closeness. After analyzing these issues, one proposed solution is for Annie to practice self-disclosure to deepen their closeness that may also improve their ability to discuss and resolve future challenging issues (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.17). This solution is based on the DMMI that asserts the importance of considering relational quality and predicted response to disclosure (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.4). Annie should open up to Gino regarding her employment decision and how they can adapt to it using positive words and by being prepared to handle potential negative reactions from Gino. She should be able to identify Gino’s counterarguments and find logically and emotionally convincing appeals to reduce his anxiety for upcoming changes. This solution will work because it harnesses the power of self-disclosure in anticipating responses and designing positive communication and interaction strategies (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.4). The second proposal is to focus first on metacommunication to prepare the couple’s mindsets in responding to challenging ideas and goals (Määttä & Uusiautti, 2013, p.36). This is based on the IPMI because it combines facts, emotions, and ideas when referring to disclosure (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). In relation, the couple should be able to talk about how they talk, in order to fully condition themselves on how to openly and honestly communicate facts, emotions, and ideas to one another. In particular, Annie and Gino should spend time discussing the ways they communicate and the communication tools they use, and how they can open themselves to surprising or possibly stressful partner and self disclosures. They should identify how they frame problems and offer solutions and determine the strengths and weaknesses of their framing to improve interpersonal communication. This will work because, after enhancing metacommunication, Annie and Gino can be better communicators. Annie can practice self-disclosure, while Gino can also do the same, where their disclosures can enhance their intimacy because they would no longer be hiding important feelings and thoughts from one another (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). In other words, metacommunication development is one of the initials steps to self-disclosure management and relationship quality development. The final recommendation is for Annie to improve her metacommunication first, so that she could also help develop her husband’s metacommunication. Using the DMMI, she can identify why silence is not effective in interpersonal communication. She must then determine ways that can improve her self-disclosure decision. The IPMI further highlights that Annie should trust that they have enough closeness to build stronger metacommunication, and this, in turn, will improve positive self-disclosure and partner disclosure experiences (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). Essentially, Annie can enhance metacommunication through self-awareness of her self-disclosure practices. After improving metacommunication, Annie should then proceed to disclosing her issue with her husband. She must prepare for any negative responses and react in a positive and logical manner. If Gino reacts very negatively, Annie must suggest further work on their metacommunication, or talk about how they talk, in order to resolve communication issues (Magsamen Conrad et al., 2008, p.7). She must not easily give up on self-disclosure, and instead, model proper self-disclosure to her husband. With high level of intimacy, they can resolve these issues and enhance their disclosure decision making models too as individuals and as a couple. This case proves that self-disclosure is essential to resolving communication issues that can result to relationship quality problems. Annie needs to practice and enhance self-disclosure strategies, in order to prevent the revelation of her goals and feelings from negatively affecting their marriage. She must also practice metacommunication and encourage her husband to do the same, so that they could improve their communication mindsets and practices. Annie does not have to dwell in silence and expect that problems will go away. Silence hurts romantic relationships more if it produces anxiety and tension. Silence should be replaced with self-disclosure to enhance closeness and trust that are building blocks of strong and happy marriages. References Farber, B.A., & Sohn, A.E. (2007). Patterns of self-disclosure in psychotherapy and marriage. Psychotherapy: Theory, Research, Practice, Training, 44(2), 226-231. Greene, K. (2008). An integrated model of health disclosure decision-making. In T. D. Afifi & W. A. Afifi (Eds.), Uncertainty and information regulation in interpersonal contexts: Theories and applications. New York: Routledge. Hubbard, A., Aune, K., & Lee, H. (2009). Communication qualities, quantity, satisfaction, and talk impact in newly developing relationships: A longitudinal analysis. International Communication Association, 2009 Annual Meeting, 1-37. Jorgensen, S.R., & Gaudy, J.C. (1980). Self-disclosure and satisfaction in marriage: The relation examined. Family Relations, 80(29), 281-288. Kito, M. (2005). Self-disclosure in romantic relationships and friendships among American and Japanese College Students. Journal of Social Psychology, 145(2), 127-140. Määttä, K., & Uusiautti, S. (2013). Silence is not golden: Review of studies of couple interaction. Communication Studies, 64(1), 33-48. Magsamen Conrad, K., Greene, K., Banerjee, S.C., & Bagdasarov, Z. (2008). Self-disclosure in existing relationships: Response and relational closeness. Communication Association. 2008, 1-33. Reis, H. T., & Shaver, P. (1988). Intimacy as an interpersonal process. In S. Duck (Ed.), Handbook of personal relationships (pp. 367–389). Chichester, England: Wiley & Sons. Zane, N., & Ku, H. (2014). Effects of ethnic match, gender match, acculturation, cultural identity, and face concern on self-disclosure in counseling for Asian Americans. Asian American Journal of Psychology, 5(1), 66-74. Read More