ABSTRACT
SELF-DISCLOSURE AND ACCULTURATION WITHIN THE
UNITED STATES EAST INDIAN COMMUNITY
Over the past 30 years, studies on social groups and cultural influences
have helped researchers understand the conditions in which people confide and
withhold personal information. The purpose of this study was to study selfdisclosure with a focus on the difference between East Indians and non East
Indians. The present study examined whether a sample of 76 second generation
East Indian Americans living in the United States scored lower than 81 non East
Indians on the revised Magno Self Disclosure questionnaire. It was also examined
if East Indians who scored higher on the Suinn Lew Self Identity Acculturation
scale would score higher on the Magno Self Disclosure scale. East Indian
participants did score significantly lower on the measure of self-disclosure than
non East Indians and East Indians who scored higher on the self-disclosure
measure scored significantly higher on acculturation to Western United States
practices. Results indicate that East Indians tend to self-disclose less information
than non East Indians, but those who are more acculturated disclose more,
indicating their practices more closely follow American groups cultural and social
norms.
Karmjot Grewal
May 2011
SELF-DISCLOSURE AND ACCULTURATION WITHIN THE
UNITED STATES EAST INDIAN COMMUNITY
by
Karmjot Grewal
A thesis
submitted in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of
Master of Arts in Psychology
in the College of Science and Mathematics
California State University, Fresno
May 2011
APPROVED
For the Department of Psychology:
We, the undersigned, certify that the thesis of the following student
meets the required standards of scholarship, format, and style of the
university and the student's graduate degree program for the
awarding of the master's degree.
Karmjot Grewal
Thesis Author
Constance Jones (Chair)
Psychology
Robert Levine
Psychology
Shane Moreman
Communication
For the University Graduate Committee:
Dean, Division of Graduate Studies
AUTHORIZATION FOR REPRODUCTION
OF MASTER’S THESIS
X
I grant permission for the reproduction of this thesis in part or in
its entirety without further authorization from me, on the
condition that the person or agency requesting reproduction
absorbs the cost and provides proper acknowledgment of
authorship.
Permission to reproduce this thesis in part or in its entirety must
be obtained from me.
Signature of thesis author:
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This research project would not have been possible without the support of
many people. I wish to express gratitude to my supervisor, Dr. Constance Jones,
who was abundantly helpful and offered invaluable assistance, support and
guidance. Deepest gratitude is also due to the members of the supervisory
committee, Dr. Robert Levine and Dr. Shane Moreman without whose knowledge
and assistance this study would not have been successful.
I would like to convey thanks to my parents for encouraging and supporting
me throughout my academic career. I would also like to thank my siblings for their
understanding and endless love, throughout the duration of my studies. Last but
not least I dedicate all my academic and life success to the individual who through
his life and death taught me about patience, kindness, and perseverance throughout
all of life’s adventures: my Nana Ji, Mr. Chanan Singh Kooner.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Page
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................. vi LIST OF FIGURES ................................................................................................ vii CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION ............................................................................ 1 CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW ................................................................. 3 Culture ............................................................................................................... 3 Self-Disclosure .................................................................................................. 4 Self-Disclosure: Cross Cultural Studies ............................................................ 5 Acculturation ..................................................................................................... 9 Research Questions ......................................................................................... 11 CHAPTER 3: METHOD........................................................................................ 12 Participants ...................................................................................................... 12 Instruments ...................................................................................................... 12 Design and Procedure ..................................................................................... 13 Research Hypotheses ...................................................................................... 14 CHAPTER 4: RESULTS ....................................................................................... 15 CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION ................................................................................. 17 APPENDICES ........................................................................................................ 23 APPENDIX A: SELF-DISCLOSURE QUESTIONNAIRE.................................. 24 APPENDIX B: ACCULTURATION QUESTIONNAIRE ................................... 29 APPENDIX C: INFORMED CONSENT FORM .................................................. 35 LIST OF TABLES
Page
Table 1. Mean Disclosure Scores Between Ethnicities .......................................... 15 LIST OF FIGURES
Page
Figure 1. Mean self-disclosure between non-East Indian and East Indian
participants ............................................................................................. 16 Figure 2. Correlation between acculturation and self-disclosure scores ............... 16 CHAPTER 1: INTRODUCTION
The United States of America is unique in the sense that nearly all her
citizens have ancestors who immigrated from another country and culture (with
the noticeable exception of Native Americans). Once Americans arrive, they often
establish their own cultural identity as United States citizens. Being part of a
culture and understanding its norms and customs are very important for inclusion
and acceptance into the group.
India is a subcontinent located in East Asia. For the purposes of this
research I focused on United States citizens who are East Indians. According to
the annual flow report conducted by the office of Homeland Security in 2009,
there were 276,375 immigrants from East Asia who permanently moved to the
United States (United States Census, 2010). With 7.9% of those immigrants
coming from East India, Asia has the second highest rate of immigrants moving to
the United States, superseded only by Mexico, with 38% of all new immigrants
coming in 2009 (Lee, 2010). According to the United States Census 2010 there
are 308 million United States citizens and over 3.7 million of them are East Indian
(United States Census, 2010). This makes them a large and interesting culture
group to study in terms of acculturation and adaptation to a new society.
The racial designation “East Indian” was once primarily used to describe
citizens of all of the East Indies, but more recently, it has been used most
commonly to refer to an Indian from India in order to avoid the potential
confusion with the term American Indian (Reya, 2001). Because in the United
States Native Americans are also referred to as Indians, for the purposes of this
study I will refer to all Indians used in my study and other studies as East Indians.
2
Self-disclosure is an important building block for intimacy; intimacy cannot
be achieved without it. We expect self-disclosure to be reciprocal and appropriate.
Self-disclosure can be analyzed in terms of cost and rewards, which can be further
explained by social exchange theory. Most self-disclosure usually occurs early in
relational development, but more intimate self-disclosure occurs later. Cultural
variables such as collectivism, ethnic identity, and acculturation are related to selfdisclosure differences. The United States has many different culture groups living
in one area, which makes self-disclosure practices interesting due to the diversity
of backgrounds and cultural norms to which each group is accustomed. More
specifically, in the Central Valley of California, there is a very ethnically diverse
population of individuals who come from many different countries and who have
very different acceptable and nonacceptable self-disclosure practices.
The present study examined the significant cultural behavior of selfdisclosure in East Indians currently living in the Central Valley of California and
compared their scores with non East Indians. In addition, the association between
East Indians’ acculturation and self-disclosure was examined. It is important to
study this group’s adaptation and views on self disclosure and acculturation to the
United States culture to understand how immigrants transition from one way of
thinking to another. Focusing on the U.S. East Indian community, the goal was to
gain further information on acculturation and self-disclosure in the young
generation of East Indians living in the United States. This topic is important
because East Indians are a growing group of immigrants in America and
communication styles are an essential part of adapting to new societies.
CHAPTER 2: LITERATURE REVIEW
Social psychology is the study of the relations of people and groups
(Foldger, 1987). Scholars from this interdisciplinary field of psychology are
typically psychologists, sociologists, intercultural communication scholars, and
anthropologists. The main focus within social psychology is to understand how
groups communicate, form, and create relations and customs. Researchers try to
explain social situations and interactions between the person and situational
variables (Greenberg & Folger, 1988). Cultural studies are an important part of
social psychology. The current study falls in the general area of social psychology
because this is the study of relations and communication. This study focuses on
self-disclosure from a cultural viewpoint, tying this into the field of social
psychology by exploring cross-cultural differences in self-disclosure practices.
Culture
Culture can be defined as the sum of the total learned behaviors of a group
of people, generally considered the tradition of that people, which are transmitted
from generation to generation (Horenstein & Downey, 2003). Cultural identity is
knowing how and when to act in a social setting (Hall, 1993). When individuals
are members of a certain social group, they tend to follow the social norms and
traditions of the group.
There are two distinct categories used for classifying culture groups:
collectivistic and individualistic. Collectivistic cultures are defined as groups or
societies that emphasize the family and group progression towards goal attainment
more so than individual achievements (Ramsey, 2004). Examples of collectivistic
cultures around the world are China, Japan, Korea, and India. In contrast,
individualistic cultures emphasize personal achievement at the expense of group
4
goals, resulting in a strong sense of competition. Examples of individualistic
cultures are the United States and England.
Countries can be categorized as collectivistic and individualistic using the
Individualism-Collectivism Scale of Triandis and Gelfand (1998). This is a
modified version of Singelis, Triandis, Bhawuk, and Gelfand’s (1995) 32-item
scale. The most frequently used scale has 16 items, each with a 7-point Likert type
scale. This measure was used to classify China, Japan, Korea, and India as
collectivistic cultures and the United States and England as individualistic cultures
(Triandis & Gelfand, 1998).
Self-Disclosure
Although there are many ways to define self-disclosure, for the purposes of
this research it is defined as both the conscious and unconscious act of revealing
information about oneself to others. This may include, but is not limited to,
thoughts, feelings, aspirations, goals, failures, successes, fears, dreams as well as
likes, dislikes, and favorites (Jourard, 2001).
Self-disclosure is seen as a very intimate action where one can feel at ease
and have a level of comfort with another person or group and agree to share
personal information. Self-disclosure is one way to learn about how people think
and feel. Once one person engages in self-disclosing conversations with another
person, it is implied that the other person will also disclose personal information as
a result of norm of reciprocity. The reciprocity norm is the social expectation that
people will respond to each other in a kind and cordial manner, returning benefits
for benefits, and responding with either indifference or hostility to harm. Mutual
disclosure deepens trust in the relationships and helps both people understand each
5
other more. Intimacy grows between individuals when they disclose information
to one another.
Self-disclosure also involves risk and vulnerability on the part of the person
sharing the information (Bloomgarden, 2000). One potential risk is that the person
will not respond favorably to the information. Self-disclosure is not limited to
positive information only. Also, self-disclosure does not automatically lead to
favorable impressions. Another risk is that the other person will gain power in the
relationship because of the information possessed. Finally, too much selfdisclosure or self-disclosure that comes too early in a relationship can damage the
relationship. Thus, self-disclosure may be both useful and damaging to a
relationship.
One of the most widely used scales of measurement used to assess selfdisclosure is the Jourard Self Disclosure Questionnaire. This questionnaire was
developed in 1971 and has since become the most common measure of selfdisclosure. Many researchers use this to measure participants’ levels of openness
and willingness to disclose information. It is also used to analyze self-disclosure
from a cross-cultural perspective. Since the creation of this questionnaire many
cross-cultural studies have been done.
Self-Disclosure: Cross Cultural Studies
Many studies have been done in regards to the effects of self-disclosure on
family, spousal relationships, and society overall. Major research studies have
also been done on different cultures and ethnicities to study whether or not there is
a significant difference between those of different cultures with respect to their
self-disclosure.
6
Ramsey (2004) argued that there is a distribution of cultural systems within
different culture systems. He showed that through fundamental constraint with the
presence of the six culture bounds transformation, reception, implementation,
propagation, production, and evaluation showed that, on average, members of
collectivistic cultures are more open to disclosing personal information about
themselves to strangers and are also more extroverted than participants from
individualistic cultures. He also concluded that members of collectivistic cultures
tended to have a more “hands off” approach when it came to disclosing
information about themselves and their family members. Collectivistic cultural
groups will disclose information openly when they are amongst their own society
and are not forthcoming to members of an outside culture, most likely due to their
cultural bonds to their own society (Ramsey, 2004).
Srivastava, Saksena, and Kapoor (1979) studied the difference in selfdisclosure among tribal and nontribal boys in an Indian culture in India. This
study was initially inspired by Lewin’s (1935) study of the difference in selfdisclosure and personality impression models between Germans and Americans.
The researchers found it was important to understand the association between selfdisclosure and cultural practices in a developing country like India, where social
class differences and a child’s upbringing are different than in the United States.
In India it is common to have a joint family upbringing, with the entire immediate
family living together under one roof (i.e., parents who have three children, who
are also all married and raise the children all together in the same home).
Srivastava et al. examined 50 tribal young boys (born and raised in a village in the
outskirts of Tharu, India) and 50 boy participants from the industrialized big city
of Kanpur, India. Members of their own group and members of the opposite
group interviewed the boys, randomly selecting what the participants would be
7
asked and with whom they would self-disclose. They were asked a series of
questions about their lives, lifestyle, education, and family backgrounds.
Results showed that the tribal boys scored significantly higher than the
nontribal boys on ratings of self-disclosure. The tribal participants shared
significantly more information and disclosed more personality trait questions than
the nontribal boys. The tribal boys were very open about their family structures,
dreams, and goals for their futures. The researchers believe that the higher
disclosure rate can be attributed to the lifestyle of the Tharu Indians, who are a
“simple, peace loving tribe” (Srivastava, 1977). Cultural practices and social
modeling in their tribe have an effect on the degree of self-disclosure. The
researchers also concluded that the tribal and nontribal boys who were studied are
not equally expressive and communicative.
A similar study was done by Franco, Malloy, and Gonzalez (1984), who
were some of the first researchers of self-disclosure to take into the cultural
component of Hispanics in the United States. The researchers used Anglo
(individualistic) and Mexican Americans (collectivistic) participants who were
analyzed based on their frequency of reported self-disclosure on preferred topics
(i.e., discussing their relationships with their mothers, fathers, siblings, and
spouse). The researchers measured the relationship between the degrees of
acculturation and reported self-disclosure. The speculation was made that
Mexican American participants were more inclined to disclose personal
information about their romantic relationships with members of their own culture
rather than the Anglo people. There was no significant difference with respect to
whom the Anglo people felt comfortable sharing the information.
Shechtman and Halevi (2006) studied counseling groups of mixed Jewish
and Arab counseling trainees to explore cultural differences in a group therapy
8
setting. The results indicated more similarities than differences between the
groups, contrary to a good deal of literature. Arabs, believed to be collectivistic
and therefore predicted to be poor clients for group counseling, in fact performed
no differently in frequency of self-disclosure or level of intimacy. This study
begins to erode some assumptions of non-Western cultures (or collectivistic
cultures) as inherently poor clients because of assumptions about incompatibility
with group psychotherapy. Shechtman and Halevi caution against unnecessarily
modifying interventions for different cultural groups in counseling. Rather, leaders
and/or therapists should not assume that therapy and group counseling will not
benefit those from non-Western cultures. Also, when it came to intrusive questions
about their religious beliefs and sexual history, the Arab participants answered
more questions than the Jewish participants. This was an interesting finding
because of the difference in cultural norms between the two groups.
A follow-up study to the Shechtman and Halevi (2006) research was done
by Shechtman and Vurembrand (2007). This study, conducted in Israel, studied
the effects of group counseling/therapy on self-disclosure in a close friendship of
preadolescent men and women. The method used in the study was an initial short
monologue to a close friend that was recorded and analyzed before and after the
intervention and compared to a control group. Results of this study indicated that
scores for girls were higher than those for boys both in quality of information that
was presented and quantity of self-disclosure. The Israeli community is not
known for its openness to speak (Shechtman & Vurembrand, 2007).
Magno, Cuason, and Figueroa (1998) did a groundbreaking study on selfdisclosure in which they also created a very dynamic self-disclosure questionnaire.
They used nine hypothesized factors attributed to self-disclosure: emotional state,
interpersonal relationship, personal matters, problems, religion, sex, taste,
9
thoughts, and work-study styles. Based on those criteria the researchers created a
60-item questionnaire that determined the level of self-disclosure. For their study
83 participants completed their questionnaire and they concluded that of the nine
factors, there was a high correlation of self disclosure, meaning in those nine
factors if participants were rated high they were more likely to self-disclose
personal information. There were repeated trials and many pretests done with the
questionnaire before the study was conducted. This scale is beneficial because of
the implications and factors that it targets.
Acculturation
Acculturation is an important factor in terms of self-disclosure practices.
One’s culture and society norms will have a big importance on whether one would
self-disclose information to other people. Whittacker (1997) defines acculturation
as the socialization or adoption of the behaviors and patterns of the surrounding
culture. Others define it as the modification of one’s culture resulted by
associating with other cultures (Reya, 2001).
The Suinn-Lew self-acculturation scale has been widely accredited for its
importance and also for its reliability and validity. The Suinn-Lew Asian Self
Identity scale is a 26-item scale that has been used to study the acculturation
among East Asian cultures. This scale targets participants of Chinese, Japanese,
Korean, and Vietnamese descent. This scale has a high reliability and the original
study showed participants from Asian countries will adopt other cultural practices
at a faster rate than other cultural groups but will still retain their heritage.
There have been limited studies done on the correlation between
acculturation and ethnicity in the past. Franco et al. did a study on the ethnic and
acculturation differences in self-disclosure among Hispanic Americans and Anglo
10
participants. This study incorporated the study of self-disclosure and acculturation
attributes among the groups they tested. Approximately 60 Anglo men and
women and 60 Hispanic Americans were studied on levels of self-disclosure and
acculturation attributes. Using the Jourard Self Disclosure questionnaire and the
Hispanic acculturation scale they invented, they showed that women scored
significantly higher on measures of self-disclosure than men. They did not find a
significant ethnicity difference in reported self-disclosure. In their discussion they
indicated that they believe one of the reasons that Hispanic Americans are more
susceptible to self-disclosure is because they are a collectivistic culture and it is
more socially acceptable for them to socialize and vocalize their ideas than it is in
the individualistic/American culture.
Acculturation is related to the research on self disclosure because the
amount of information individuals are willing to disclose depends on how
connected they are to their cultural group and how well they understand the norms
of the culture. It is imperative to study acculturation when studying selfdisclosure among different culture groups.
All the studies conducted indicate the different measures and conditions
under which people disclose information and how different cultures find ways of
disclosing information. The purpose of this research is to understand how
different culture groups interact and share information about themselves, which is
key to understanding intercultural communication.
East Indians are a collectivistic culture; they are traditionally very exclusive
when it comes to disclosing personal information (Srivastava, 1977). Indians
mainly disclose information within their own nuclear families and discourage
familial information to be discussed outside of the family (Ram, 2004). This is
very different from the American culture. Americans are taught as a culture to
11
express our attitudes and feelings to others from a young age. There are
approximately 2.7 million East Indians living in the United States today (Ram,
2004). Since there is a large migration of Indians to America we would like to
see how the new generations of Indians feel about self-disclosure within their
families and community.
It is important to get an understanding of how this group self discloses
personal information because of the many political issues they face; including post
terrorism attacks of the World Trade Centers and Pentagon. In current U.S. history
we now have added a national tragedy when terrorists from supposed Middle
Eastern countries attacked major United States monuments, which caused an
obscene amount of life lost and catastrophic detriments to the U.S. economy. This
changed the dynamic of this country and in turn has induced a negative stigma to
U.S. citizens who share similar body and facial features to those supposed Middle
Eastern terrorists, thus making citizens from East Asia a feared and stigmatized
group of society. This also makes them an interesting group to study now to see if
they have a large bias of self-disclosure versus other groups.
Research Questions
The research questions follow: Do East Indians living in the United States
of America self disclose less personal information than non-East Indians living in
the United States of America? Also, will more acculturated East Indians self
disclose more than less acculturated East Indians?
CHAPTER 3: METHOD
Participants
The participants for this study were 76 East Indian men and women ranging
from the ages of 18-30 and 81 non-East Indian participants ranging from the ages
of 18-30. All participants are currently living in the Central Valley of California;
this was a convenience sample of the populations. The non-East Indian
participants were selected by asking students from the California State University,
Fresno Psychology department to participate. The East Indian participants were
found at California State University, Fresno as well as the Indian Student
Association of Fresno.
Instruments
One independent variable is whether the participant is East Indian or nonEast Indian, collected through self-report. This variable is presumed reliable and
valid. Two questionnaires were also used to assess variables for this study. The
first is a modified version of the Magno Self Disclosure Scale (see Appendix A).
This questionnaire has 60 questions and is scored based on the number of points
totaled by each participant. The Magno Self Disclosure scale is a self-report,
retrospective instrument in which participants rate the extent to which they have
shared various aspects of themselves with specific target people. This
questionnaire has been shown to have good reliability and validity, with Magno
reporting a split-half reliability coefficient of .95 for studies using samples of
Black American, White American, and Latino individuals. This self-disclosure
scale has also performed well in validity checks performed by Pearson and Higbee
(1968), who reported both convergent and divergent validity with various scales,
giving multitrait-multimethod matrices for an ethnically mixed sample.
13
East Indian participants also completed the 26-item Suinn-Lew SelfIdentity Acculturation Scale questionnaire (see Appendix B). This questionnaire
is scored based on the total number of points accumulated. There is much evidence
to suggest that the Suinn Lew Self-Identity Acculturation scale is capable of
producing reliable scores (Ponterotto, Baluch, & Carielli, 1998). Scores on this
scale generate internal consistency estimates ranging from .68 to .88. The SuinnLew Self-Identity Acculturation scale is a five-factor model and has been
validated in both exploratory and confirmatory factor analysis investigations. The
five factors underlying acculturation scores were reading, writing, cultural
preferences, ethnic interaction, generational identity, and affinity for ethnic
identity. Miller (1999) also found that the measures of acculturation are equivalent
for both men and women.
Design and Procedure
This study was a nonexperimental, cross-sectional study comparing East
Indians and non-East Indians with respect to self-disclosure scores and
acculturation scores for East Indians. Data collection began by having the
participants come into the examination room and fill out an Informed Consent
Form (see Appendix C). After the participants read and signed the consent form
we proceeded to give instructions for our study. Each participant received the
Magno Self-Disclosure questionnaire and was asked to fill it out entirely. After it
was completed and handed back, we then proceeded to give the participants the
Suinn-Lew Self-Identity Acculturation Scale Questionnaire to only the East Indian
participants. The non-East Indian participants only had to complete the selfdisclosure questionnaire, whereas the East Indian participants filled out both the
self-disclosure and acculturation questionnaires. After the participants completed
14
the questionnaires and we collected them, we proceeded to debrief the participants
on the purpose of this research. We then thanked them and they were excused
from the study.
Research Hypotheses
The research hypothesis was that East Indians living in America would
score lower on the Magno Self Disclosure scale than non East Indians living in
America. The second hypothesis was that East Indians who score higher on the
Suinn-Lew Self-Identity Acculturation scale will score higher on the Magno Self
Disclosure scale.
CHAPTER 4: RESULTS
There were a total of 157 participants: 76 East Indian and 81 non-East
Indian participants. The researcher’s hypothesis was that the non-East Indians
would score higher on the Magno Self Disclosure scale than East Indians living in
America. The non-East Indian participants (M= 182.22, SD=3.97) on average had
significantly higher self-disclosure than the East Indian participants (M=164.36,
SD=3.32), t(155) =3.43, p=.001, which confirmed the research hypothesis (see
Figure 1). Cohen’s d resulted in an effect size of .50, which is a medium effect
size (see Table 1).
Table 1. Mean Disclosure Scores Between Ethnicities
Self Disclosure
Ethnicity
Acculturation
N
Mean
SD
α
Mean
SD
α
Total
157
173.57
33.72
.93
74.59
13.57
.86
Non East Indian
81
182.22
35.69
.95
-
-
-
East Indian
76
164.36
28.97
.90
74.59
13.57
.86
Correlation coefficients were computed among only the East Indian
participants (N=76) between the revised Suinn-Lew Self-Identity Acculturation
scale and the Magno Self-Disclosure scale score. The researcher’s hypothesis was
that East Indians who scored higher on the revised Suinn-Lew Self-Identity
Acculturation scale would also score higher on the Magno Self-Disclosure scale.
There was a significant positive relationship between the scores on the Magno
Self-Disclosure scale and the Suinn-Lew Self-Identity Acculturation scale, r(74)=
.44, p=.000, which confirmed the original hypothesis (see Figure 2). A Pearson r
was used to calculate an effect size; a medium effect size of .24 was found.
16
Figure 1. Mean self-disclosure between non-East Indian and East Indian
participants
Figure 2. Correlation between acculturation and self-disclosure scores
CHAPTER 5: DISCUSSION
Results of this study confirm both original hypotheses. The first hypothesis
was that non-East Indians living in America will score higher on the Magno SelfDisclosure scale than East Indians living in America, and in fact non-East Indian
participants did score significantly higher on the self-disclosure scale. There are
many different reasonings behind this finding. One possible reason is the
environmental argument; growing up in an individualistic culture with little to no
influence of collectivistic cultures will promote a higher rate of self-disclosure.
Presuming there is more variance in social settings with knowledge of both
individualist and collectivistic culture styles could yield a broader view of selfdisclosure and group discussion. Culture has an effect on how one communicates
within and outside their own culture groups. It would be interesting to study
individuals who were from an individualist culture who then moved to a
collectivistic culture and study how they score on measures of self-disclosure to
see if this is a phenomena found on both ends of self-disclosure practices.
The second hypothesis was that East Indians who score higher on the
Suinn-Lew Self-Identity Acculturation scale would score higher on the Magno
Self Disclosure scale. There was a significant positive relationship between the
two questionnaires within the East Indian participants. One possible explanation
for these results is that there is a larger effect of United States “American” culture
than was previously expected. Having existential influences of communication,
discussion, and self-disclosure changes how one believes about these
communication styles and it will naturally have an effect on how one feels about
these behaviors. Those who scored low on the acculturation scale also scored low
on the self-disclosure scale possibly because they have not fully adopted the open
18
communication dialogue technique, which is a predominately Western culture
practice. These results might not show up in certain populations and or culture
groups and it cannot be determined by this study that these results have a universal
implication to all other collectivistic culture groups.
Looking back at previous research done the results of this study tend to
follow along the same line of results. Self-disclosure has many different
components and there are numerous factors that are taken into consideration
before one omits to giving individual information. Results show that those who
come from a more collectivistic culture tend to disclose less information, which is
what Srivastava (1977) found and many other self-disclosure researchers. Having
two groups of individuals from different backgrounds seems to have a profound
effect on how they answer the same questions about self disclosure and as found
through these results acculturation also plays a role in the outcome. Acculturation
is a component that has not been studied extensively in conjunction with selfdisclosure but with the results that I obtained there is a clear connection between
self-disclosure and acculturation that needs to be further analyzed.
The results that were obtained from this study coincide with prior research
done by Ram (2004) and other researchers, but there are still many questions and
factors that need to be further understood to understand the implications that selfdisclosure has on communication between members of different culture and ethnic
backgrounds. Assimilating to the culture traits of another group has an influence
on self-disclosure and this has been found apparent by other researchers who have
looked at self-disclosure and acculturation in the past. Having a limited amount
research done on this topic has made an impact on the way this study was
conducted. There are many more measures that should be looked at in terms of
culture groups and geographical locations. The more research that can be done on
19
the correlation between these two factors the better we will understand the
communication barriers that we as a mixed society in the United States have to
face.
There were limitations to this study, which include the sample size of
participants. Having a larger sample size would add additional validity to the
study and having a relatively small sample size limits the generalization of these
results to the population. Also, having a limited number of East Indian
participants makes it difficult for these findings to generalize to all East Indians.
A large majority of the participants in this study were of Punjabi or Hindu
backgrounds and although these two subgroups are a large portion of the East
Indian population they do not speak for all other sub culture groups from India.
Having a larger variety of East Indians from different culture groups would add
more validity to the study and also show a variety of different opinions to this
topic of self-disclosure.
Another possible avenue to explore is whether or not collectivism and
individualism as a culture has a profound effect on self-disclosure. Although this
was the variable of focus in this research, it is not necessarily the key variable that
will determine individuals’ amount of self-disclosure. There are many other
variables that can be taken into account when looking at these results. Other
possible variables could be the environment or nature in which these data were
collected and also socially acceptable answers. Because these data were collected
in a professional educational setting there might be a difference in how the
participants perceive self-disclose and acculturation. Also in education settings
there is often the need to adhere and respond to questions in a socially acceptable
manner, which possibly might make participants in the East Indian group answer
these questions with the mindset of an American standpoint. Although this is
20
purely speculation, it is important to lie out possible extraneous variables that
might better describe the results found.
Another shortcoming of this study would be the fact that there is no data on
the non East Indian participants’ ethnicity. There were no questions asked about
the non East Indian participants backgrounds other than the fact that they all
recognized themselves as non East Indians prior to participating in the study. It
would have been an interesting factor to examine and see which groups and
ethnicities participated the most in this is study and also to see if it makes any
difference to the results.
There are many more additions that can be made as far as future directions
for research in this field of self-disclosure and acculturation. Further directions
may include using different Asian cultures, such as Japanese, Hmong, Middle
Eastern, and Chinese cultures. This could be a large scale study, gathering data
from all these culture groups and doing a cross cultural comparison with the
results of a self disclosure questions with American, Canadian, and English
participants. Also exploring different variables, such as age, sex, political
affiliations, and sexual orientation might be an interesting third variable to take
into consideration when looking at self disclosure in future research. This current
research has contributed to the many previous studies that have been done in the
understanding of cross cultural self-disclosure practices and we recognize there are
many more questions and research ideas that are needed to further the
understanding of this communication phenomenon.
REFERENCES
Bloomgarden, A. (2000). Self-disclosure: Is it worth the risk? Perspectives: A
Professional Journal of the Renfrew Center Foundation, 5(2), 8-9.
Franco, J., Malloy, T., & Gonzalez, R. (1984). Ethnic and acculturation
differences in self-disclosure. Journal of Psychology, 122(5), 21-32.
Foldger, R. (1987). Theory and method in social science. Contemporary Social
Psychology, 12, 51-54.
Greenberg, J., & Folger, R. (1988). The scientific status of social psychology,
Controversial Issues in Social Research Methods, 17(3), 215-225.
Hall, S. (1993). Cultural identity and diaspora. Framework Journal of Social
Psychology, 36(34), 222-237.
Horenstein,V., & Downey, J. L. (2003). A cross-cultural investigation of selfdisclosure. North American Journal of Psychology, 5(3), 373-386.
Jourard, S. M. (1971). Self-disclosure: An experimental analysis of the transparent
self. New York: Wiley.
Jourard, S. M. (2001). Gateway to mind and behavior: Positive psychology
perceptual awareness: Journal of Social Psychology, 14 (45), 320-345.
Lee, T. (2010). Identifying Hispanic populations: The influence of research
methodology upon public policy. American Journal of Public Health, 27(4),
353-356.
Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. New York: McGraw Hill.
Magno, C., Cuason, S., & Figueroa, C. (1998). The development of self-disclosure
scale. Psychological Reports, 18(5), 225-240.
Miller, L. C. (1999). Disclosure liking effects at the individual and dyadic level: A
social relations analysis. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology,
45(9), 50-60.
Pearson, F., & Higbee, J. (1968). The adaptation of African students to American
society. International Journal of Intercultural Relations, 2(32), 90-118.
22
Ponterotto, J., Baluch, S., & Carielli, D. (1998). The Suinn-Lew Asian SelfIdentity Acculturation Scale (SL-ASIA): Critique and research
recommendations. Measurement and Evaluation in Counseling and
Development, 31(2), 109-124.
Ram, K. (2004, September 1). The Indian-American population boom. Rediff
News India, 33(17). Retrieved from http://specials.rediff.com/news/2006
/sep/01sld1.htm
Ramsey, G. (2004). The fundamental constraint on the evolution of culture.
Psychology and Philosophy, 14(22), 401-414.
Reya, C. (2001). Structural equivalence of a measure of cross-cultural adjustment.
Educational and Psychological Measurement, 5, 514-521.
Singelis, T. M., Triandis, H. C., Bhawuk, D., & Gelfand, M. J. (1995). Horizontal
and vertical dimensions of individualism and collectivism: A theoretical and
measurement refinement. Cross-Cultural Research Journal, 29, 240-275.
Shechtman, Z., & Halevi, H. (2006). Does ethnicity explain function in-group
counseling? The case of Arab and Jewish counseling trainees in Israel.
American Psychological Association, 10(3), 181-193.
Shechtman, Z., & Vurembrand, C. (2007). Israel bonds and friendships: Selfdisclosure between adolescents. American Psychological Association, 14(9),
243-244.
Srivastava, R., (1977). Horizontal and vertical aspects of individualism and
collectivism: A theoretical and measurement refinement in Indian cultures.
Cross-Cultural Research, 14(29), 240-275.
Srivastava, R., Saksena, N., & Kapoor, K. (1979). Differences in self-disclosure
among tribal and nontribal boys in India. Journal of Social Psychology,
18(5), 104-121.
United States Census Bureau. (2010). United States Census Bureau population
estimates. Retrieved from http://www.census.gov/popest/estbygeo.html.
Whittacker, H. A. (1997). Psychological differentiation in cross-cultural
perspective. Journal of Cross-Cultural Psychology, 6, 4-87.
APPENDICES
APPENDIX A: SELF-DISCLOSURE QUESTIONNAIRE
25
INSTRUCTIONS: The questions, which follow, are for the purpose of collecting
information about your historical background as well as more recent behaviors, which
may be related to your cultural identity. Choose the one answer which best describes you.
Shade the circle corresponding to your answer.
N - When you have never encountered, done or felt the situation.
R - When you have encountered, done or felt the situation.
S - Sometimes you have encountered, done or felt the situation.
O - When you have encountered, done or felt the situation most of the time or often.
A - When you have encountered, done, or felt the situation all the time or always.
Please answer the test honestly. Do not leave any items unanswered. There is no right or
wrong answers. There is no time limit in taking the test so take your time
1.N R S O A I share my views about God.
2.N R S O A
I talk about my current struggles in life to others.
3.N R S O A I tell my best friend the things that worry me the most.
4.N R S O A I share my fears with my friends.
5.N R S O A
I discuss my bad experiences in love affairs.
6.N R S O A
I am open about my troubled situations with others.
7.N R S O A
I always tell someone about my intentions in life.
8.N R S O A
I like telling my personal insecurities to others.
9.N R S O A
I am open about my admiration towards the opposite sex.
10.N R S O A
I tell my friends about my problems more when it’s in a way of a
joke.
26
11. N R S O A I make sure that all my friends know my interests.
12. N R S O A
I discuss the ups and downs I have experienced in my spiritual life.
13. N R S O A
I share my happiest moments with my friends.
14. N R S O A
I talk about how concerned I am for a particular person.
15. N R S O A
I share my personal beliefs no matter how weird it is.
16. N R S O A
I talk about my spiritual life to other people.
17. N R S O A
I allow myself to be known to others.
18. N R S O A
I tell the world the kind of things that make me especially proud of
myself.
19. N R S O A
I talk about the things in the past or present that I feel ashamed or
guilty of.
20. N R S O A
I let other people know me so that they will reveal themselves.
21. N R S O A
I open myself to others wholeheartedly.
22. N R S O A
I can discuss with other people the feelings I have about my body.
23. N R S O A
I discuss my ideas openly.
24. N R S O A
I express my ideas or thoughts whenever necessary.
25. N R S O A
I tell my friends whether or not I feel I am attracted to the opposite
sex.
26. N R S O A
I feel comfortable in revealing secrets about myself.
27. N R S O A
I always tell someone about my dreams.
28. N R S O A
I talk about my troubles in a particular subject/course.
29. N R S O A
I talk about my love life in detail to friends.
30. N R S O A
I tell my best friend the style of clothes I want.
27
31. N R S O A
I share my fears with my friends.
32. N R S O A
I am open about my personal problems to others.
33. N R S O A
I share the lessons that I am learning from God.
34. N R S O A
I share the blessings of God.
35. N R S O A
I talk about my family problems to other people.
36. N R S O A
I discuss my sad moments to friends.
37. N R S O A
I talk about the kind of party or social gathering that I like best.
38. N R S O A
I discuss my past relationships when I felt I was in love.
39. N R S O A
I am open about my sexuality with others.
40. N R S O A
I share information about my fears with strangers.
41. N R S O A
Whenever I have a big fear about something I quickly approach my
parents.
42. N R S O A
I am irritated by big problem when I haven’t told anybody.
43. N R S O A
I am open about my personal standards of beauty and attractiveness
in women/men.
44. N R S O A
I feel comfortable talking to people about my problems anytime.
45. N R S O A
I talk about my personal life whenever there’s a chance.
46. N R S O A
I tell my friends and family about my ambitions in life.
47. N R S O A
I share my academic problems.
48. N R S O A
I talk in great detail about my successes.
49. N R S O A
I tell people about my sincere sense of goals.
50. N R S O A
I share with my closest friends what it takes to hurt my feelings
deeply.
28
51. N R S O A
I make sure I share something about my personal self during
conversations.
52. N R S O A
I speak comfortably to strangers on my feelings about God.
53. N R S O A
I talk about how important school grades are to me.
54. N R S O A
I share my frustrations in life with my best friend.
55. N R S O A
Whenever I have failures, I feel the need to have somebody to talk
to.
56. N R S O A
I talk about my personal views on sexual morality.
57. N R S O A
I tell my close friends who my crush is.
58. N R S O A
I tell my friends about the hassles I experience at home.
59. N R S O A
I talk about what I feel are my special strong points for my work.
60. N R S O A
I tell my problems to my friends.
This is the end of this portion of our study please inform the researcher you have
completed this section.
APPENDIX B: ACCULTURATION QUESTIONNAIRE
30
INSTRUCTIONS: The questions that follow are for the purpose of collecting information
about your historical background as well as more recent behaviors that may be related to
your cultural identity. Choose the one answer which best describes you.
1. What language or languages can you speak?
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
Indian language only (for example, Punjabi, Hindi, Gujrati, etc.)
Mostly Indian language, some English
Indian language and English about equally well (bilingual)
Mostly English, some East Indian language
Only English
2. What language or languages do you prefer?
1. Indian language only (for example, Punjabi, Hindi, Gujrati, etc.)
2. Mostly Indian language, some English
3. Indian language and English about equally well (bilingual)
4. Mostly English, some East Indian language
5. Only English
3. How do you identify yourself?
1. Indian
2. Asian
3. East Indian-American
4. East Indian-American, Punjabi-American, etc.
5. American
4. Which identification does (did) your mother use?
2. Indian
3. Asian
4. East Indian-American
5. East Indian-American, Punjabi-American, etc.
6. American
5. Which identification does (did) your father use?
1. Indian
2. Asian
3. East Indian-American
4. East Indian-American, Punjabi-American, etc.
5. American
6. What was the ethnic origin of the friends and peers you had, as a child up to age 6?
1. Almost exclusively East Indian-Americans
2. Mostly East-Indian Americans
3. About equally East Indian groups and other non East Indian groups
31
4. Mostly White, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian ethnic groups
5. Almost exclusively White, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian
7. What was the ethnic origin of the friends and peers you had, as a child
from 6 to 18?
1. Almost exclusively East Indian-Americans
2. Mostly East-Indian Americans
3. About equally East Indian groups and non East Indian groups
4. Mostly White, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian ethnic groups
5. Almost exclusively White, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian
8. Whom do you now associate within the community?
1. Almost exclusively East Indian-Americans
2. Mostly Asians, East-Indian Americans
3. About equally East Indian groups and Non East Indian groups
4. Mostly Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian ethnic groups
5. Almost exclusively Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian
9. If you could pick, whom would you prefer to associate with in the community?
1. Almost exclusively East Indian-Americans
2. Mostly Asians, East-Indian Americans
3. About equally East Indian groups and Non East Indian groups
4. Mostly Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian ethnic groups
5. Almost exclusively Whites, Blacks, Hispanics, or other non-Indian
10. What is your music preference?
1. Only Indian music (for example, Bhangra, Hindi, Pakistani, etc.)
2. Mostly Asian
3. Equally Asian and English
4. Mostly English
5. English only
11. What is your movie preference?
1. East Indian language movies only
2. East Indian language movies mostly
3. Equally East Indian and English-language movies
4. Mostly English-language movies only
5. English-language movies only
12. What generation are you? (Circle the generation that best applies to you :)
1. 1st Generation = I was born in India or country other than U.S.
32
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
2nd Generation = I was born in U.S.; either parent was born in India or country
other than U.S.
3rd Generation = I was born in U.S.; both parents were born in U.S, and all
grandparents born in Indian or country other than U.S.
4th Generation = I was born in U.S., both parents were born in U.S, and at least
one grandparent born in India or country other than U.S. and one grandparent
born in U.S.
5th Generation = I was born in U.S.; both parents were born in U.S., and all
grandparents also born in U.S.
Don't know what generation best fits since I lack some information.
13. Where were you raised?
1. In India only
2. Mostly in India, some in U.S.
3. Equally in India and U.S.
4. Mostly in U.S., some in India
5. In U.S. only
14. What contact have you had with India?
1. Raised one year or more in India
2. Lived for less than one year in India
3. Occasional visits to India
4. Occasional communications (letters, phone calls, etc.) with people in India
5. No exposure or communications with people in India
15. What is your food preference at home?
1. Exclusively East Indian food
2. Mostly East Indian food, some American
3. About equally East Indian and American
4. Mostly American food
5. Exclusively American food
16. What is your food preference in restaurants?
1. Exclusively East Indian food
2. Mostly East Indian food, some American
3. About equally East Indian and American
4. Mostly American food
5. Exclusively American food
17. Do you
1. Read only in an East Indian language?
2. Read an East Indian language better than English?
3. Read both East Indian and English equally well?
33
4. Read English better than the East Indian language?
5. Read only English?
18. Do you
1. Write only in an East Indian language?
2. Write in East Indian language better than English?
3. Write in both East Indian and English equally well?
4. Write in English better than East Indian language?
5. Write only in English?
19. If you consider yourself a member of the Indian group (Punjabi, East-Asian Asian,
etc., whatever term you prefer), how much pride do you have in this group?
1. Extremely proud
2. Moderately proud
3. Little pride
4. No pride but do not feel negative toward group
5. No pride but do feel negative toward group
20. How would you rate yourself?
1. Very Indian
2. Mostly Indian
3. Bicultural
4. Mostly Westernized
5. Very Westernized
21. Do you participate in Indian occasions, holidays, traditions, etc.?
1. Nearly all
2. Most of them
3. Some of them
4. A few of them
5. None at all
22. Rate yourself on how much you believe in Asian values (e.g., about marriage,
families, education, work):
1
2
3
4
5
do not believe
strongly believe
23. Rate yourself on how much you believe in American (Western) values:
1
2
3
4
5
do not believe
strongly believe
34
24. Rate yourself on how well you fit when with other Asians of the same ethnicity:
1
2
3
4
5
do not fit
fit in perfectly
25. Rate yourself on how well you fit when with other Americans who are non-Asian
(Westerners):
1
2
3
4
5
do not fit
fit in perfectly
26. There are many different ways in which people think of themselves. Which ONE of
the following most closely describes how you view yourself?
1. I consider myself basically an Indian person Even though I live and work in
America; I still view myself basically as an Indian person.
2. I consider myself basically as an American. Even though I have an Indian
background and characteristics, I still view myself basically as an American
3. I consider myself basically as an Indian-American. Even though I have an Indian
background and Characteristics, I still view myself basically as an American.
4. I consider myself as an Indian-American, although deep down, I view myself as
an American first.
5 I consider myself as an Indian-American. I have both Indian and American
characteristics and I view myself as a blend of both.
APPENDIX C: INFORMED CONSENT FORM
36
INFORMED CONSENT FORM
You are invited to participate in a study conducted by Dr. Constance Jones and
Karmjot Grewal of the Department of Psychology at California State University, Fresno.
We hope to learn more about self-disclosure in individualistic and collectivistic cultures.
If you decide to participate, this experiment will take no more than one hour. There are
no obvious benefits to you other than potentially learning about the acculturation and
self-disclosure practices.
Any information that is obtained in connection with this study and that can be
identified with you will remain confidential and will be disclosed only with your
permission or as required by law. If you give us your permission by signing this
document, we plan to disclose the results only by grouped data in published format. Your
data will not be individually identifiable.
Your decision whether or not to participate will not prejudice your future relations
with California State University, Fresno the Department of Psychology. If you decide to
participate, you are free to withdraw your consent and to discontinue participation at any
time without penalty. If you have any questions, please ask the experimenter now. If you
have any additional questions later, Dr. Jones (559) 278-5127 will be happy to answer
them. Questions regarding the rights of research subjects may be directed to Constance
Jones, Chair, CSUF Committee on the Protection of Human Subjects, (559) 278-4468.
You will be given a copy of this form to keep if requested.
YOU ARE MAKING A DECISION WHETHER OR NOT TO PARTICIPATE. YOUR
SIGNATURE INDICATES THAT YOU HAVE DECIDED TO PARTICIPATE,
HAVING READ THE INFORMATION PROVIDED ABOVE.
_________________________________________________________
Date
Signature
_________________________________________________________
Signature of Investigator
California State University, Fresno
Non-Exclusive Distribution License
(to make your thesis available electronically via the library’s eCollections database)
By submitting this license, you (the author or copyright holder) grant to CSU, Fresno
Digital Scholar the non-exclusive right to reproduce, translate (as defined in the next
paragraph), and/or distribute your submission (including the abstract) worldwide in print
and electronic format and in any medium, including but not limited to audio or video.
You agree that CSU, Fresno may, without changing the content, translate the submission
to any medium or format for the purpose of preservation.
You also agree that the submission is your original work, and that you have the right to
grant the rights contained in this license. You also represent that your submission does
not, to the best of your knowledge, infringe upon anyone’s copyright.
If the submission reproduces material for which you do not hold copyright and that would
not be considered fair use outside the copyright law, you represent that you have obtained
the unrestricted permission of the copyright owner to grant CSU, Fresno the rights
required by this license, and that such third-party material is clearly identified and
acknowledged within the text or content of the submission.
If the submission is based upon work that has been sponsored or supported by an agency
or organization other than California State University, Fresno, you represent that you
have fulfilled any right of review or other obligations required by such contract or
agreement.
California State University, Fresno will clearly identify your name as the author or owner
of the submission and will not make any alteration, other than as allowed by this license,
to your submission. By typing your name and date in the fields below, you indicate
your agreement to the terms of this distribution license.
Karmjot Grewal
Type full name as it appears on submission
4/15/11
Date