This study attempts to better understand relationship processes that promote or enhance a couple’s experience of emotional intimacy in their relationship. An overarching goal of the research is to test Reis and Shaver’s (1988) interpersonal process model of intimacy with a sample of committed, romantic couples. The interpersonal process model asserts that discussions involving self-disclosure and empathic responding will result in subjective feelings of emotional intimacy. Reis and Shaver’s model suggests that more vulnerable self-disclosure will promote deeper levels of emotional understanding and concern, subsequently resulting in greater subjective intimacy. Analyses tested the interpersonal process model of intimacy by examining self- and partner-reports of self-disclosure, empathic responding, and emotional intimacy. In this study, data were collected on 108 committed romantic couples from the community. Couples completed a packet of questionnaires individually and then engaged in videotaped interactions in which they discussed times when (a) someone other than their partner hurt their feelings (low-risk), and (b) their partner hurt their feelings (high-risk). The discussion topics were aimed at eliciting vulnerable self-disclosure and empathic responding. Results support the interpersonal process model, showing that self-disclosure and empathy are positively related to greater reports of post-interaction intimacy. Empathy proved to have a stronger impact on intimacy in high-risk discussions than low-risk discussions. The impact of self-disclosure and empathy on intimacy did not differ for men and women, suggesting that similar processes are at work for both genders. Methodological and clinical implications are discussed, along with suggestions for future research.

Intimacy is an important component of romantic relationships and a lack of intimacy is one of the most common presenting problems of distressed couples, but the process through which intimacy develops is not well understood. This study examined the evidence for the interpersonal process model of intimacy described by Reis and Shaver (1988), which proposes that self-disclosure and empathic responding are the basis of intimate interactions. The sample consisted of 108 community couples who completed measures of intimacy after having videotaped discussions about relationship injuries that occurred both within and outside of the relationship. The Couples' Intimate Behavior Coding System (CIB) was developed to assess depth of factual, emotional, and cognitive self-disclosure and components of empathic responding in these discussions. Results indicate that males' own disclosure and empathic responding predicted their feelings of intimacy, whereas females' intimacy was predicted by their partner's disclosure and empathic responding. The effects of both self- and partner-disclosure appear to have been driven by factual and emotional components of disclosure. These results provide preliminary evidence that self-disclosure and empathic responding are important behaviors in the development of intimate feelings for both men and women, but the manner in which these behaviors influence intimacy differs by gender.

This study attempts to better understand relationship processes that promote or enhance a couple’s experience of emotional intimacy in their relationship. An overarching goal of the research is to test Reis and Shaver’s (1988) interpersonal process model of intimacy with a sample of committed, romantic couples. The interpersonal process model asserts that discussions involving self-disclosure and empathic responding will result in subjective feelings of emotional intimacy. Reis and Shaver’s model suggests that more vulnerable self-disclosure will promote deeper levels of emotional understanding and concern, subsequently resulting in greater subjective intimacy. Analyses tested the interpersonal process model of intimacy by examining self- and partner-reports of self-disclosure, empathic responding, and emotional intimacy. In this study, data were collected on 108 committed romantic couples from the community. Couples completed a packet of questionnaires individually and then engaged in videotaped interactions in which they discussed times when (a) someone other than their partner hurt their feelings (low-risk), and (b) their partner hurt their feelings (high-risk). The discussion topics were aimed at eliciting vulnerable self-disclosure and empathic responding. Results support the interpersonal process model, showing that self-disclosure and empathy are positively related to greater reports of post-interaction intimacy. Empathy proved to have a stronger impact on intimacy in high-risk discussions than low-risk discussions. The impact of self-disclosure and empathy on intimacy did not differ for men and women, suggesting that similar processes are at work for both genders. Methodological and clinical implications are discussed, along with suggestions for future research.

Intimacy is an important component of romantic relationships and a lack of intimacy is one of the most common presenting problems of distressed couples, but the process through which intimacy develops is not well understood. This study examined the evidence for the interpersonal process model of intimacy described by Reis and Shaver (1988), which proposes that self-disclosure and empathic responding are the basis of intimate interactions. The sample consisted of 108 community couples who completed measures of intimacy after having videotaped discussions about relationship injuries that occurred both within and outside of the relationship. The Couples' Intimate Behavior Coding System (CIB) was developed to assess depth of factual, emotional, and cognitive self-disclosure and components of empathic responding in these discussions. Results indicate that males' own disclosure and empathic responding predicted their feelings of intimacy, whereas females' intimacy was predicted by their partner's disclosure and empathic responding. The effects of both self- and partner-disclosure appear to have been driven by factual and emotional components of disclosure. These results provide preliminary evidence that self-disclosure and empathic responding are important behaviors in the development of intimate feelings for both men and women, but the manner in which these behaviors influence intimacy differs by gender.

This study develops an empirically based taxonomy of closeness in personal relationships that is applicable for both genders across the life course for English- and Xhosa-speaking inhabitants of Grahamstown, South Africa. The intent was to confront certain problems of theoretical incoherence and hence of fragmentation in empirical research have beset the still relatively new area of interpersonal closeness, or intimacy, in academic psychology. To this end the author has sought to develop an analytical delineation of the parameters of intimacy in general through a comprehensive and unbiased research strategy. A rigorously random sample of 200 inhabitants of Grahamstown was divided egually by gender, ethnicity, and five age groupings. The subjects replied to an openended questionnaire of 56 items, many which required them to name an individual (or i n d i v i d u als) w h o m they would choose in a series of closeness contexts. Life histories were also gathered. All answers were coded, with relationship responses divided into the three age-, ethnic- and gender-neutral categories of "family," "friends" and "other." The null hypotnesis that intimacy is a single factor was disproved by a count procedure to measure homogeneity/ heterogeneity of response. Although no one mentioned the same person in response to all the guestions, neither were the responses widely dispersed. Thus one might conclude that the phenomenon of closeness is multidimensional, rather than either completely homogeneous or totally heterogeneous. On the basis of the ratio between family, friend, and other responses, a nonparametric "goodnecs-of-fit" test (confirmed by Cramer's V) compared the pattern of responses on each guestion to that of every other. The method then clustered together response ratios that fitted closely with at least two others in the group. This procedure identified eleven dimensions of closeness, nine of which form a Closeness Continuum ranging from those with a high ratio of family responses (Ascribed category) to those in which the family-friend ratio is more nearly equal (voluntary category). This division enables a researcher to distinguish between "familiar" and '‘friend-like" close relationships without making a formal kin/nonkin dichotomization. The two dimensions which fall outside the Closeness Continuum deal with the practical areas of finances and personal services, respectively. The balance of the study looks at the three independent variables — age, ethnicity, and gender — as regards both their homogeneity/heterogeneity of responses and their correlations with the dimensions of closeness. Most interesting with regard to age is the finding that children and middle-aged adults scored proportionally higher on ascribed closeness while young adults were highest on the voluntary dimensions. Young adulthood, and to a lesser extent adolescence and senior adulthood, are each in their own right periods of transition in close relationships. Quantitative results agreed with a careful hermeneutic analysis of the qualitative life history material. The findings raise serious questions about studies of closeness based upon samples of college students. Xhosa and English-speaking networks of closeness were totally segregated from each other (an artefact of institutionalized racism). Although black South Africans listed more close others at the outset of the interview, their range of mentions on the questionnaire was no greater than that of the white English-speakers. On the closeness dimensions, blacks mentioned somewhat more family than did the whites, especially on the ascribed end of the continuum, but the differences were not so great as might have been expected, given studies on working class personal relationships. Striking differences were noted, however, with regard to discursive idiom about relationships. With regard to gender, male and female family/friend mentions on the Closeness Continuum did not differ significantly. In terms of whether respondents mentioned males or females, however, significant differences emerged. In the Ascribed dimensions, females mentioned males and females about egually, thus nnt rejecting the null hypothesis, whereas males mentioned femaAes two to three times as often, an asymmetry matched by an imbalance of division of labour in the Practical category. In the Voluntary dimensions, same-gender mentions predominated. Further, where males mentioned females or females mentioned males, the mentions were almost exclusively family members (except for the young adult group). The implications of these findings for contemporary feminist psychological theory are discussed at length in the text.

This research extends previous work on measuring eight dimensions of self-disclosure on intimate relationship satisfaction. 134 individuals answered a questionnaire concerning how they self-disclosed to their partner. I predicted that overall self-disclosure (all eight dimensions combined) would be positively related to degree of relationship satisfaction. Second, overall self-disclosure would be positively related to degree of relationship satisfaction when controlling for gender, length of relationship, and whether the respondent was referring to a current or former partner. Furthermore, I predicted that each dimension of self-disclosure would be positively related to relationship satisfaction. Results indicate that not all of my hypotheses were supported. For example, one's tastes and interests and one's self-feelings were statistically negatively significant with relationship satisfaction. Self-disclosure is an important part of relationship satisfaction, while distinguishing which dimension of self-disclosure had more importance proved to be a more complicated factor. / Master of Science

Thesis (D. Min.)--Trinity International University, 2007. / Abstract. Description based on print version record. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 284-302).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Trinity International University, 2007. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 284-302).

Thesis (D. Min.)--Trinity International University, 2007. / Abstract. Includes bibliographical references (leaves 284-302).

Thesis project (D. Min.)--Denver Seminary, 2004. / Includes bibliographical references (leaves 220-234).