Sidney M. Jourard

Some Effects of Self-Disclosure Among College Women

Experience from psychotherapy shows that the majority of patients commence the psychotherapeutic relationship with many resistances to authentic and spontaneous self-disclosure; however, as the relationship unfolds, they become more able to reveal their unexpurgated experience to the therapist. This suggests there is something about the behavior of the therapist that affects the disclosing behavior of the patient. The senior author (Jourard, 1964, 1968) proposed that authentic disclosure from the therapist functions both as an invitational &dquo;model&dquo; to be emulated by the patient and as a &dquo;reinforcer&dquo; of self-disclosure from the patient. Powell (1964, 1967) provided some support for this view. He demonstrated that the most powerful &dquo;reinforcer&dquo; of self-disclosing behavior in a subject participating in an experimental interview was self-disclosure from the interviewer. When the interviewer responded to a subject’s disclosures with relevant authentic disclosure of his own, it increased the subject’s disclosure output more than did approvingsupporting responses and reflection-restatement responses. This finding was supported by studies of Himelstein and Kimbrough (1963) and Chittick and Himelstein (1967). It appears that self-disclosing behavior from one person functions as an invitation to another person

Astrological Sun Signs and Self-Disclosure:

Popular interst in astrology as a guide to self-understanding has mounted in the past decade. Increased numbers of my students appear to be &dquo;true believers&dquo; in the influence of the stars and planets upon their characters and destinies. From time to time I read astrological advice as it appears in the newspapers, and, of course, I have been interested in the traits attributed to those born under the sign of Aquarius, as I was. Linda Goodman (1971) says:

Education as Dialogue

another human being is saying, and the choice to respond in dishonesty, is at the heart of our dilemma on the shrinking planet we call Earth. There are too few places to learn dialogue. From infancy, children are exposed to those who wish to shape, influence, persuade, bribe, command, or threaten them. Too few people invite them to speak their truth. Too few listen and hear, and speak truth in return. Everywhere there is the struggle to dominate and impose one’s views upon others. Education, if it is anything, is dialogue. It is an invitation from someone, living or dead, to engage in a process which enlarges one’s perspective. If education is not dialogue, then it is not education. What is dialogue, that it so seldom happens? It is, first of all, catching someone’s attention so he or she listens to what you are saying. And it is

Sex in Marriage1

Lets talk first about something altogether rare-a happily married couple who love one another, not only in the sober sense of loving as Erich Fromm portrays it, but a couple who can enjoy each other, delighting in one another’s company. They know each other; care for and about each other; respond to the needs, actions and emotions of each other; and respect each other’s idiosyncrasies and uniqueness, not striving to sculpture each other into some image of what they are not. This is love according to Fromm (1, p. 26), and for that matter, it is love even according to my own rather unromantic treatment of the theme. I defined love (2, p. 234), not as