LAKEHEAD UNIVERSITY

DEPRESSION, QUANTITY OF SOCIAL INTERACTION,

RECIPROCAL SELF-DISCLOSURE, AND PERSPECTIVE-TAKING

IN THE ELDERLY

A THESIS

SUBMITTED TO THE FACULTY OF ARTS

IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT OF THE

MASTER OF ARTS DEGREE

DEPARTMENT OF PSYCHOLOGY
THUNDER BAY, ONTARIO

FEBRUARY, 1985
 ProQuest Number: 10611291

All rights reserved

INFORMATION TO ALL USERS

The quality of this reproduction is dependent upon the quality of the copy submitted.

In the unlikely event that the author did not send a complete manuscript
and there are missing pages, these will be noted. Also, if material had to be removed,
a note will indicate the deletion.

ProOuest
ProQuest 10611291

Published by ProQuest LLC (2017). Copyright of the Dissertation is held by the Author.

All rights reserved.

This work is protected against unauthorized copying under Title 17, United States Code
Microform Edition © ProQuest LLC.

ProQuest LLC.
789 East Eisenhower Parkway
P.O. Box 1346
Ann Arbor, Ml 48106 - 1346
 ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my appreciation to

Dr. K, Rotenberg and to Dr. W.T. Melnyk for their

assistance throughout the production of this

thesis. I would also like to thank Dr. J.

Jamieson for his many helpful suggestions.

In addition, I am greatly indebted to Mrs. J.

Sanderson, the staff, and the residents of

Sherwood Lodge without whose cooperation this

research could not have been completed.

 TABLE- OF CONTENTS

Page

Acknowledgements ii

Table of Contents ....ill

List of Tables... v

List of Appendices vi

Abstract vii

The Problem 1

The Issue 3

Activity in the Elderly 4

Social Interaction 7
Self-Disclosure 13
Egocentrism and Perspective-Taking 22

Overview and Hypotheses 28

METHOD 32

Subjects 32

Measures 33

Procedure 35

RESULTS 37
Demographic Data 37

Coding of the Quantity of Social Interaction Measures... 38

Coding of the Quality of Social Interaction Measures.... 38

 Ill

Intimacy of Self-Disclosure 38

Reciprocal Disclosure 39

Disclosure Reciprocity 39
Intimacy of Reciprocal Disclosure 40

Unique Intimacy . 40

Cumulative Intimacy.... 41

Coding of the Egocentrism or Perspective-Taking Measure. 41

Coding of the Depression Measure.. 41

Validity Checks 41

Correlational Analyses 43

IV DISCUSSION 47

V REFERENCES 52

VI APPENDICES. 60
 iV

LIST OF TABLES

Page

1., Means and Standard Deviations of the Demographic

Characteristics of the Population 37A

2. Means and Standard Deviations of Depression,

the Quantity of Social Interaction, the Quality

of Social Interaction and Perspective-Taking

Measures 44A

3. Correlational Matrix Among the Measures of

Depression, Gender, Quantity of Social Interaction,

the Quality of Social Interaction, and Perspective-

Taking 44B
 V

APPENDICES

Page

A. Demographic Information 60

B. Quantity of Social Interaction Scale 63

C. Self“Disclosure Index (Disclosure-Output) 66

D. Self-Disclosure Index (Disclosure Knowledge) 68

E. Self-Rating Depression Scale 70

F. Letter of Introduction 72

G. Letter of Consent 74

H. Perspective-Taking Scoring Instructions.. 76

 Abstract

The present research was designed to investigate the

relationships among; a) depression, b) the quantity of

social interaction and, c) the quality of social

interaction in the elderly. Twenty-three residents aged

72 to 98 of a rural senior citizens home were tested. The

subjects were administered the Zung Self-Rating Depression

Scale and Flavell's (1975) measure of visual

perspective-taking. The quantity of social interaction

was measured by the subject's self-reports of their

frequency of interaction with various groups of people and

the number of persons they talked to most frequently. The

measure of the quality of social interaction was derived

from a round robin procedure based on the subjects'

reported self-disclosure to peers. This enabled the

identification of subjects who had relationships

characterized by reciprocal intimate disclosures - or

confidants. The analysis provided partial support for the

validity of the quantity and the quality of social
interaction measures. Consistent with previous research,

depression was negatively correlated with one measure of

quantity of social interaction, the number of peers with

whom the subject frequently talked. Contrary to

expectation, perspective-taking was not significantly

correlated with the measures of quantity of social

 VI 1

interaction or the measures of reciprocal disclosure.

Contrary to the quality of social interaction research, the

intimacy of the subject's disclosures and the intimacy of

the target's disclosures were not significantly correlated,

indicating that disclosure patterns among the elderly were

not reciprocal. In addition, having a relationship

characterized by reciprocal intimate disclosure was

positively, rather than negatively correlated with

depression. This indicates that the more depressed an
elderly individual is, the more the individual had in

objective terms - confidants. One interpretation of this

latter finding was advanced, that depressed elderly

reciprocate personal information in the form of negative

perceptions or complaints.
The Problem

The present thesis is concerned with the factors that

may contribute to depression in the elderly. The concept

of depression has generally been investigated within the

parameters of two related paradigms that may be referred

to as the medical model and the psychological model. The

implications of the term depression is to some extent

dependent upon the specific model used. The medical model

utilizes the term depression to refer to a diagnosed

disorder. The psychological model, on the other hand,

generally uses the term depression to refer to depressive

symptoms which may vary in severity or degree. The medical

model has clinically defined depression as "a dysphoric

mood, usually ... (associated with a) loss of interest or

pleasure in all or almost all usual activities or

pastimes. It is generally prominent, relatively

persistent, and associated with other symptoms of the

depressive syndrome ... (such as appetite loss, change in

weight, change in sleep patterns, etc.)” (DSM-III, 1980,

p. 210). The psychological model defines depression as "an

emotional reaction, altered mood state, and symptom complex

accompanied by negative self-concept and lowered

self-esteem and associated with regressive and

self-punitive wishes" (Murray et al., 1980, p.550).

Related measures have been used to assess depression and

depressive symptoms. For example, either model may assess

depression and depressive symptoms utilizing self-report
 2

questionnaires/ such" as the'Langer scale, and inventories

completed by raters from unstructured or semi-structured

interviews such as the Geriatric Mental Status or the

Combined Mental Status Schedule (Gurland, 1976). The

medical model, in addition, includes psychiatric

examination and diagnosis.

Research clearly indicates that depression is a

problem in the elderly, although there is some

disagreement concerning the extent of the problem. For

example, studies utilizing the medical model have found

that the frequency of depressive disorders is correlated

with age and sex categories. Specifically, depressive

disorders are more frequently diagnosed in persons between

the ages of 25 and 65 years of age as compared to other

age groups. In addition, females are more frequently

diagnosed as depressed until approximately age 45. After

age 45, frequency of female depression begins to decrease

while male diagnostic rates begin to increase. Thus, by

age 70 depression in males may even outnumber that in

females (Gurland, 1976). Estimates of the frequency of

depressive disorders in the elderly range from 2-4%

(Gurland, 1976) to as high as 25% (Busse & Wang, 1974).

Conversely, the psychological model indicates that the

frequency of depressive symptoms are highest in the over 65

age group (Gurland, 1976). The very high rate of

depressive symptoms, in the elderly, are very distressing

(Silverman, 1968) with estimates between 10% (Gurland,

1976) and 65% (Pfeiffer & Busse, 1973) being reported in

 3

the literature. In addition, depression is conceptually

similar to morale and life satisfaction. Consistent with

this, numerous investigations have demonstrated that

depressive symptoms are correlated with the elderly

individual's degree of life satisfaction and morale

(Maddox, 1965) .

Researchers have suggested that the variation in

prevalence rates may be due to the wide variation in

assessment devices utilized for assessment purposes, as

well as the experience and training of the clinician

(Gurland, 1976). Furthermore, it has been proposed that

depression in the elderly has been overlooked because the

symptoms are regarded as characteristic of senescence,

organic impairment, or simply the inevitable

accompaniments to aging, rather than as depression

(Epstein, 1976), Thus, it is apparent that depression in

the elderly may be an even greater problem than available

estimates indicate. The following paper will use the term

depression to refer to the psychological model of

depressive symptoms.

The Issue

Some research indicates that one important factor

contributing to depression is the individual's level of

activity or social interaction (Havighurst, Neugarten, &

Tobin, 1968; Maddox, 1965). Investigation of the activity

theory by Maddox (1965) for example, found that high levels

 4

of activity and social interaction were positively

correlated with the individual's life satisfaction score.

However, such investigations correlating social

interaction/activity with morale and life satisfaction have

been criticized for neglecting to consider the quality of

the interaction. The existing theory and research points

to two important aspects of the quality of social

interaction that may affect depression in the elderly:

1) the form of the opportunity for intimate disclosure

and, 2) the elderly individual's degree of egocentrism or

correspondingly his/her lack of ability to take the

perspective of another. The present research will focus

upon the above identified dimensions of social interaction

which may contribute to depression in the elderly. The

specific factors which will be investigated include: the

frequency of social interaction, reciprocal intimate

self-disclosure, and egocentrism/perspective-taking.

Activity in the Elderly

Disengagement theory is one prominent approach that

has been used to describe responses to the aging process.

Disengagement theory, first proposed by Cummings and Henry

(1961) postulates that a reduction in the frequency of

interactions with the environment is desired by both the

elderly individual and society. The theory postulates that

decreased emotional investment in others and an

individual's preoccupation with the self are adaptive

 5

responses to aging that are associated with life

satisfaction. However, the theory also states that

disengagement will be dysfunctional and the individual will

suffer if the time of disengagement between the individual

and society is incongruent.

A second approach, the activity theory (Havighurst &

Albrecht, 1953) postulates that activity and life

satisfaction are positively correlated, and that the

greater the loss in one's social activities the lower

one's life satisfaction (Lemon et al., 1972). The theory

suggests that the needs and values of old age are the same

as in middle age. However, social norms such as forced

retirement and physiological decline often prevent the

elderly individual from fulfilling one's natural

tendencies. Thus, the individual must replace lost

activities and roles with alternative activities and roles

if morale and life satisfaction are to be maintained

(Havighurst et al., 1968; Havighurst & Albrecht, 1953).

The two contrasting theories have served to generate

research investigating the relationship between activity

and well-being. One such study (Maddox & Eisdorfer, 1962)

investigated the relationship between activity and morale

in persons above 60 years of age. The subjects were

divided into four groups based on high or low activity and

morale scores. The results provided support for the

activity theory by indicating that high activity was

associated with high morale and low activity with low

morale for 73% of the subjects. Maddox (1965) then

 6

separated activity into' interpersonal and non-

interpersonal activity. The results indicated that the

subject's total activity score, composed of both

interpersonal and non-interpersonal activity subscores,

was more highly correlated with life satisfaction than

either individual subscore. The results also indicated

that for the youngest elderly subjects the absence of

clinical depression was positively correlated with high

levels of activity. A similar study conducted by Markides

and Martin (1979) provided additional support for the

relationship between activity and life satisfaction. The

results of their path analysis revealed that one's activity

level, composed of both interpersonal and non-interpersonal

activity, both directly and indirectly influenced life

satisfaction in the elderly.

A somewhat different perspective proposed by

Neugarten, Havighurst, and Tobin (1965) suggested that an

individual's personality is the pivotal dimension in the

relationship between life satisfaction and social role

activity. Their study suggested that life satisfaction

was associated with activity more often than non-activity,

but with some exceptions. Those individuals who had chosen

low activity levels were satisfied with their low level of

activity; such as those labelled the disengaged or

rocking-chair types, the armored-defended types, and the

passive-dependent personality types.

 7

Social Interaction

Following the lead of activity theory, researchers

have focused upon social interaction as a potential

contributing factor to depression in the elderly. The term

social interaction typically refers to the amount and

frequency of social contact with other persons, such as

family, friends, and associates (Beckman, 1981; Conner &

Powers, 1975). Research generally indicates that the

quantity of social interaction can be used to predict

contentment, morale (Larson, 1978), life satisfaction

(Harel et al., 1979; Larson, 1978; Leviton, 1982), and

satisfaction with treatment (Harel et al., 1982). Data

also indicated that as the frequency of visitation

increases the level of psychosocial impairment decreases

(Greene & Monahan, 1982). The association between

subjective well-being, referred to as contentment, morale,

life satisfaction, and related constructs (such as marital

status, income, health, residence, availability of

transportation, etc.) (Larson, 1978) and the frequency of

social interaction supports the activity theory of

successful aging.
Further support for the activity theory was found in a

study investigating the relationship between social

isolation and psychosocial functioning, Qualls, Justice,

& Allen (1980) found that isolation from family members was

associated with numerous social difficulties. For example,

 8

social isolation was correlated with one's level of social

functioning, drug and alcohol abuse, low productivity,

trouble with the law, dependency on public agencies,

diminished capability to cope successfully with the
stresses of daily life, and with the implementation of less
desirable coping mechanisms. AlsOr isolation from friends

was found to correlate most strongly with depression and

to a lesser extent, with decreased levels of social

functioning.

More recent research, however, has consistently

criticized such investigations for ignoring the quality of

social interaction. The quality of social interaction has

been conceptualized in various ways. Beckman (1981)

proposed that it is the subjective or perceived level of

satisfaction ”... with the amount of contact and quality of

(social) contact" (Beckman, 1981, p.l078). Previous

investigators including Beckman (1981) have suggested

that the quality of social interaction was a more salient

factor contributing to well-being than the quantity of

social interaction. Such hypotheses led Beckman (1981) to

investigate the influence of both the quantity and the

quality of social interaction on measures of psychological

well-being consisting of morale, depression, and social

isolation. The quantity of social interaction was measured

by asking subjects to rate how frequently they interacted

with eight different categories of people. The quality of

social interaction was then assessed by requesting the

subjects to rate their degree of satisfaction with both the

 9

amount and the quality of their interaction with each

person previously mentioned. A five point scale ranging

from very dissatisfied to very satisfied was used for both

satisfaction measures. Beckman then compared the elderly

women's well-being scores to the quantity and the quality

of contact with their children versus with friends and

associates. Among other findings, the results indicated,

that for mothers, well-being was most strongly correlated

with the quality of one's contacts whereas, for

non-mothers, well-being was correlated with both the

quantity and the quality of the individual's contacts.

Investigations by Chiriboga (1982) and Larson (1978)

provided additional support for the predicted relationship

between the quality of social interaction and well-being.

Their investigations indicated that the disruption in

psychological and social functioning which followed

marital separation or divorce was greater in older adults

than in younger adults (Chiriboga, 1982) and greater for

recent widows without a confidant, than widows with a

confidant (Larson, 1978).

The qualitative measures such as that used by Beckman

(1981) have also been criticized. For example, Norris,

Rubin, Cohen, & Both (1983) suggested that such measures

are still assessing the quantity of social interaction,

but in a more sophisticated manner; for example, in terms

of the presence or absence of a confidant. Another

investigation used to assess the quantity and the quality

of social interaction in a somewhat different manner was

 10

conducted by Cohen and Ra-jkowski’ (1982) . Their study was

primarily concerned with the investigation of the concept

friendship, a measure of the quality of social

interaction. They proposed that one individual's concept
of friendship may not be equivalent to the researchers'

concept of friendship, or to another individual's concept

of friendship. Thus, variations in friendship patterns

found in previous investigations may simply be the result

of different individual's different concept and use of the

abstract terms for defining and assessing the concept. The

authors concluded that network analysis was one method

which could be successfully used to tap the various

levels and manifestations of social relationships. To.

achieve this goal the subjects were given the

Comprehensive Assessment and Referral Evaluation (CARE) and

the Network Analysis Profile (NAP). The CARE was used to

assess physical health, mental health, and social

functioning and the NAP to assess what may be referred to

as the quantity and the quality of social interaction.

The quantity of social interaction was assessed by

measuring the frequency, duration,' and intensity of the

single room occupancy (SRO) elderly's various exchanges

with others. The quality of the relationship was assessed

by charting the directional flow and content of such

exchanges. Accordingly, the subjects were required to

report on the frequency of visits they typically received

from others in their rooms or in the community lounge;

frequency of exchanges in informal conversation; advice;

 11

money; drinking/drugs; food;aid;, medical aid; other aid;

eating out together; other social outings; and whether

intimate thoughts were shared. The results indicated that

persons rated as non-friends often engaged in activities

typically associated with friends. For example, both

friend and non-friend contacts exchanged more than one

type of content (eg. conversation, loans), were considered

intimate, and subjectively important. Further comparison

of friend/non-friend contacts indicated that friends were

typically seen less frequently, known longer, and lived

more often outside the hotel. The authors concluded that

reported friendship patterns typical of the general

population may not be applicable to the elderly living in

the SRO.

Although the investigation by Cohen and Rajkowski

(1982) provides additional evidence for a relationship

between the quantity and the quality of social interaction

within the SRO elderly, it also generates several

questions. The SRO elderly, for example, are not

representative of the general population (Cohen &

Sokolovsky, 1980), therefore, behavior patterns in the

general population may differ substantially from those

found in the above investigation. The authors also

reported that the subjects were administered the CARE, but

associations between the CARE (which included depression)

and the NAP were not reported. Thus, one can only wonder

what, if any, relationship exists between factors assessed

on the CARE, such as depression, and the behaviors

 12

identified in"the’NAP.

A second investigation which has yielded additional

data regarding the quality of social interaction was

conducted by Snow and Crapo (1982). Their sample of

elderly medical patients were requested to complete the

Emotional Bondedness Scale, while referring to a

confidant. The confidant was described as the person "...

you most trust and confide in" (Snow & Crapo, 1982, p.
610). The measure was composed of 12 items that required

the subject to evaluate on a 3 point scale a given

statement's accuracy in depicting their relationship with

the aforementioned confidant. The self-report measure was

conceptualized as assessing the extent of emotional

support, mutual sharing, and feelings of positive affect

an individual experiences in their relationship with a

confidant. The scale was compared to two measures of

subjective well-being (Affect Balance Scale and Life

Satisfaction Index-A) and three measures of health

including self-rated health, the Sickness-Impact Profile,

and Zung's Self-Rating Depression Scale. The data analysis

revealed that emotional bondedness was positively

correlated with both measures of subjective well-being.

The correlation between emotional bondedness and

depression, unfortunately, was not reported by the

authors.

Although previous research has studied the

relationship between well-being and the presence of a

confidant (Chiriboga, 1982; Larson 1978) the

 13

investigation by Snow* and Crapp (1982) was a pioneering

attempt at discerning the qualities of a confidant. One

major problem with the investigation, however, concerns

the validity of the subjects' self-reports of emotional

bondedness. For example, the Emotional Bondedness Scale

is strictly subjective, therefore, the correspondence

between the obtained ratings and actual social

relationships is not known. Consider, for example, the

mutual sharing aspect of the scale. There is no

objective evidence indicating whether the subject

contributed to his/her relationship and whether the

confidant reciprocated that contribution. It is also

possible that the ratings simply reflect the individual's

positive or negative view of social relationships. This

issue is important because the correlation between

emotional bondedness and life satisfaction may reflect the

common attribute of perceived satisfaction, rather than a

correspondence between a specific type of social

relationship and life satisfaction (depression). One

purpose of the present research is to investigate this

latter relationship by assessing the validity of

self-reports and by assessing, as objectively as possible,

the quality of the social relationship.

Self-Disclosure

One aspect of the quality of social interaction that

has been dealt with by researchers, such as Snow and Crapo

 14

(1982), can be termed self-disclosure with a confidant.

Self-disclosure is defined as the act of revealing

personally relevant information about one-self to another

(Jourard, 1961). It is considered to be an indice of the

"closeness" (Jourard, 1959, p.428) of the relationship.

The extensive literature on self-disclosure has encompassed

such areas as the: content of self-disclosure, reciprocal

self-disclosure, loneliness, and also, to a more limited

extent, self-disclosure patterns within the elderly.

Various characteristics of self-disclosure have been

investigated by researchers. Jourard and Lasakow (1958),

for example, found that females disclose more than males.

The amount of self-disclosure, in addition to gender, has

been found to be dependent upon the target of the

disclosure. Unmarried college students, for example,

reported higher amounts of self- disclosure to mother than

to a variety of others such as: father, male friend, or

female friend. Married subjects reported that they

disclosed more information to their spouse than to others

such as: mother, father, or same-sex friend. Additional

research indicates that the content of self-disclosure is

also dependent upon gender. College females, for example,

disclose more information in the interpersonal, area than

college males; whereas, college males have a tendency to

disclose more information regarding their social and

political attitudes than college females (Rubin, 1978).

The research by Cohen and Rajkowski (1982), on the other

hand, suggested that such gender distinctions may not

 15

apply,, at least to those elderly in the SRO. Their results

suggested that gender is only minimally correlated with

the recipient of intimate thoughts. Due to the

non-generalizability of their results, patterns of

self^disclosure in other elderly populations should be

investigated.

AT' means of determining the validity of self-disclosure

was established by Jourard and Landsman (1960), During

their investigation, the subjects were interviewed by one

of the authors, who requested information contained on a

15-item Self-Disclosure Questionnaire. The authors then

assessed disclosure-output by asking each subject what

information contained on the questionaire he had revealed

to the eight fellow subjects in the study.

Disclosure-intake was also determined by asking each

subject what information on the questionnaire was known of

each of the other subjects. In addition, subjects were

asked which of their fellow subjects they liked best and

also, knew best. The authors reported that the close

association between disclosure-output, disclosure-intake,
and the interview data demonstrated the validity of the

questionaire. Furthermore, the correlation between

disclosure and knowing was stronger than the correlation

between disclosure and liking. Therefore, this study

suggested that an individual discloses to others he knows

best and in turn, knows best those individuals who disclose

to him.

Previous research has suggested that liking someone

 16

does, not necessarily lead to self-disclosure.. In an

attempt to identify factor(s) which may lead to

self-disclosure, Miller, Berg, and Archer (1983) suggested

that self-disclosure by a target ■individual may be

dependent upon that individual's ability to elicit

self-disclosure. The authors began testing their

hypothesis by initially administering several indices

designed to assess various dimensions of the individual

including the individual's self-rated assessment of whether

they characteristically elicited self-disclosure from

others and if they themselves were high disclosers.

Individuals scoring within the upper or lower third of the

original population on either scale were then selected to

participate in a second investigation. Various

combinations of high or low scoring eliciters participated

in a semi-structured conversation with high and low

disclosers. The results indicated that low eliciters of

disclosure did not perceive differences in their high or

low disclosing partners, although, independent raters and

the disclosers, perceived differences in the level of

intimate disclosure elicited. Therefore, Miller et al.

(1983) concluded that the ability to elicit

self-disclosure may influence the accuracy of one's

perception of the self-disclosure of others.

A consistent finding in research investigating

patterns of self-disclosure has been termed reciprocal

self-disclosure. Reciprocal self-disclosure generally

refers to the ' pattern of communication whereby the

 17

disclosure from one individual is met by- reciprocal

disclosure from a second individual (Perlman & Cozby,

1983). It has been proposed that the "norm of reciprocity”

(Gouldner, 1960, p.l71) governs such patterns of

self-disclosing behavior. A number of investigations

(Jourard, 1959; Jourard & Landsman, 1960; Jourard &

Richman, 1963) have provided support for this position.

For example, Jourard (1959) found that the

disclosure-outputs of female nursing students were

correlated with the disclosure-inputs of their nursing

colleagues. Similarly, Jourard and Richman (1963) found

that subjects' reports of their disclosure-outputs to

specified target persons such as mother, father, and best

friend were positively correlated with the

disclosure-inputs also reported by those specified target

persons. Davis (1976), in turn, has indicated that one

individual in a dyad assumes major responsibility for the

level of intimacy and the second individual fulfills the

norm of reciprocity by responding with equally intimate

disclosure.

Previous investigators have also hypothesized that

reciprocal disclosure in the acquaintance process will

lead to the development of mutual trust and liking

associated with the development of relationships (Altman &

Taylor, 1973). Investigation of the relationship between

reciprocal self-disclosure and liking during the

acquaintance process (Cozby, 1972), and within established

relationships (Jourard, 1959), supported such a

 18

hypothesis. Additionally, the-research indicated that the

intimacy levels of such disclosure influences the reported

degree of liking. Cozby (1972), for example, has indicated

that medium levels of disclosure were more strongly

correlated with liking than low or high levels of intimate

disclosure. Whereas, Brewer and Mittelman (1980)

indicated that strangers rated trust highest after

receiving medium disclosure. Correspondingly, Jourard

(1959) found that in a group of individuals well-acquainted

with each other, the two individuals least-liked

indiscriminately disclosed high or low levels of intimacy.

The level of intimacy of disclosure, in addition to

liking, has been found to influence the likelihood of

reciprocal disclosure during the acquaintance process.

Cosby (1972) found that high levels of intimate disclosure

were less frequently met with reciprocal disclosure than

either low or medium intimacy levels. Archer and Berg

(1978) further demonstrated that the level of intimacy

influenced a subject's response differently, dependent upon

the specific experimental condition used in their

investigation. Their subjects were presented with

self-descriptions of either high, medium, or low intimacy

and asked to either "respond" or "respond writing whatever

you wish". Their results indicated that when subjects were

given the freedom to respond as they wished, reciprocal

disclosure was much more probable.

Research in self-disclosure has also dealt extensively

with the concept of loneliness. Loneliness has been

 19

defined as the . person's conclusion that he^ or she has

fewer or less initial social relationships than desired or

expected. Furthermore, this conclusion is associated with

a negative emotional tone ranging from mild discomfort to

intense pain" (Solano et al., 1982, p. 524). Loneliness is

viewed as a distinct and separate emotional state from that

of depression (Weeks & Bragg, 1980). Research indicates

that although loneliness and depression are not causal,

they often co-occur. Loneliness, in addition to

depression, (Qualls et al,, 1980) has been associated with

patterns of social interaction.

One such investigation compared loneliness to an

individual's pattern of self- disclosure. The

investigation by Chelune, Sultan, and Williams (1980)

revealed that lonely women have difficulty revealing

personal information appropriately to new acquaintances,

although the difficulty was significantly diminished in

established relationships and structured social

situations. The lonely and non-lonely females also

differed in their patterns of social activity. The level

of social activity in females who adapted their patterns of

self-disclosure to situational cues was greater than the

social activity levels of females who did not adapt their

self-disclosures. This was indicative of an association

between one's activity level and pattern of

self-disclosure.

Further investigation of the relationship between

loneliness and pattern of self-disclosure was conducted by

 20

Solano, Battenv and Parish, (1982). Their results

indicated that for both male and female subjects,

loneliness was associated with the amount and form of

self-disclosure. The results also indicated that the

lonely subjects were significantly less well known and

made different choices in topic intimacy than non-lonely

subjects. Lonely subjects chose high intimacy topics for

same sex-partner conversations and low-intimacy topics for

opposite sex-partner conversations. Non-lonely subjects

chose a reverse pattern. The results also indicated that

lonely people, who chose low-intimacy topics, failed to

perceive the lack of intimacy in their conversations with

others. Lonely persons reported a higher degree of
familarity following their conversation with a non-lonely
stranger, than did the non-lonely stranger. The lonely

subjects did not appear to perceive the other individual's

lack of involvement in the conversation. Thus, the

authors concluded that both self-perceived and actual

self-disclosure patterns differ among lonely and non-lonely

college students.

Patterns of self-disclosure also differ among lonely

and non-lonely elderly subjects (Perlman et al., 1978).

The elderly subjects in this study were requested to

respond to a self-administered questionnaire containing 101

closed-ended questions. The questionnaire encompassed such

areas as;- health, social contacts, social anxiety, social

influence, self-disclosure, social and leisure activities,

recent emotional feelings, and life satisfaction. The

 21

results indicated that the frequency of social interaction

was associated with loneliness, as assessed using 11 items

from the UCLA loneliness scale and 2 items measuring the

frequency and intensity of current loneliness. A stronger

positive^ correlation between loneliness and frequency of

interaction was found between the subject and friendship

contacts than that found between the subject and child

contacts. Willingness to disclose was not associated with

loneliness, however, lonely subjects were more willing to

disclose high intimate topics to acquaintances than

non-lonely subjects. The authors suggested that this may

be indicative of less sensitivity to appropriate

self-disclosure patterns. Although, lonely and non-lonely

individuals did not differ in the frequency of

participation in organized activities, lonely individuals

did report lower frequencies of participation in leisure

activities with friends. In addition, lonely individuals

more frequently reported feelings of emptiness, low

energy, restlessness, boredom, as well as lower life

satisfaction. The authors concluded that avoiding

loneliness was associated with maintaining social contacts,

developing new social contacts, and with maintaining

control over one's personal affairs.

Patterns of self-disclosure have rarely been

investigated within elderly populations. The study by

Perlman, Gerson, & Spinner (1978) indicated that further

research is warranted with specific attention focused upon

reciprocal patterns of self-disclosure.

 22

Egocentrism and Perspective-Taking

The success in establishing a reciprocal pattern of

self-disclosure may be associated* with the individual's

degree of egocentrism. Piaget (1950) referred to

egocentrism as a lack of differentiation in some aspect of

subject-object orientation or interaction. Looft (1972)

states that "... egocentrism is not selfishness or the

extensive use of or 'me'; it is an embeddedness in

one's own point of view". Conversely, perspective-taking

is viewed as the individual's ability to consider his/her

behavior simultaneously from different perspectives (Feffer

& Suchotliff, 1966). Egocentrism is thought to permeate

functioning in numerous spheres during the early stages of

development including: cognition, perception, speech,

emotions, and attitudes (Muuss, 1982).

Central to the concept of egocentrism is the process

of decentration. Decentration is the process by which a

young child becomes able to discriminate subject from

object in subject-object interactions (Piaget, 1950), This

ability has been termed perspective-taking. It refers to

"the ability to recognize, articulate, and coordinate the

differing perspectives and internal states of others"

(Marsh, 1981, p.38). According to the social relationship

hypothesis the process of decentration occurs primarily as

a result of the exchange of information, often dissonant

information, during social interactions with one's peers.

 23

The- individual', as a result of the examination and

re-examination of other perspectives and one's own

perspective, as a function of social interaction,

progresses to higher thought processes and learns to take

another's point of view.

The ability to decenter is viewed as a concrete

operational skill which, theoretically, should not change

qualitatively in adulthood; the mental processes involved

are invariant, unidirectional, and irreversible (Flavell,

1970). Looft (1972), by contrast, proposed that

egocentrism is evident in the elderly, and may account for

a wide pattern of behaviors documented in the literature.

Support for Looft's position has been demonstrated in a

number of studies (Bielby & Papalia, 1975; Looft &

Charles, 1971; Rubin, 1974; Rubin et al., 1973)

investigating the relationship between egocentrism and

age. Tasks assessing visual and communicative

perspective-taking, as well as conservation, have been

reported as indicating that egocentrism is higher in older

adult groups than in younger adult groups (Bielby &

Papalia, 1975; Looft & Charles, 1971; Rubin,1974; Rubin et

al., 1973). Alternatively, an investigation conducted by

Tesch, Whitbourne, and Nehrke (1978) did not support

Looft's position. Age-related differences in the

performance of visual and communicative perspective-taking

were not found in a group of males between 33 and 83 years

of age, from a single environmental setting. Their results

suggested that perspective-taking abilities were maintained

 24

throughout adulthood.

A variety of factors have been postulated as

contributing to the poorer performance of elderly subjects

documented in the literature. Such factors include cohort

differences, differences in the level of educational

attainment, and a reduced amount of social interaction

(Looft, 1972). Cohort differences have not as yet been

determined (Looft, 1972) and results regarding educational

differences are somewhat inconsistent (Bielby & Papalia,

1975? Rubin, 1974; Rubin et al.,1973; Tesch et al., 1978).

Support for the hypothesized relationship between

egocentrism and social interaction has been documented

with individuals of different age groups. Cowan (1966),

for example, demonstrated that performance on a visual

perspective-taking task in children aged 8, ^9, and 10

years was correlated with the child's performance during
social interaction. An investigation by Marsh, Serafica,

and Barenboim (1981) studied the interrelationships

between affective and social perspective-taking,

interpersonal functioning, and interpersonal problem

solving in eighth grade children. The authors found a

positive correlation between affective perspective-taking

and effective interpersonal functioning; although, no

correlation was found between social perspective-taking

and interpersonal functioning. A third investigation,

conducted by Feffer and Suchotliff (1966), indicated that

the ability to take the perspective of another is

correlated with measures of social interaction. These

 25

resultsvwere obtained by administering a role- taking task

assessing decentering ability to 36 undergraduate

students. Dyads were then formed, composed of students who

had obtained similar scores on the role-taking task. The

performance of the subject pairs were then assessed during

social interaction on a password game including: a) face

to face verbal interaction, and b) back to back verbal

clue, written response interaction. The 36 subjects were

also assessed on measures of vocabulary, word-fluency, and

word-association. The results indicated that the dyad

role-taking score differences correlated with the scores

obtained during the social interaction task. The results

were interpreted as support for the hypothesis that

effective social interaction is a function of an

individual's ability to consider his or her behavior

simultaneously from different viewpoints (Feffer &

Suchotliff, 1966).

Looft and Charles (1971) hypothesized that the losses

often associated with elderly individuals may include a

reduction in the amount of social interaction with one's

peers. They hypothesized that the loss of social

interaction may result in a) decreased opportunity to

exchange and examine different points of view, and in turn,

b) decreased perspective-taking skills or increased

egocentrism. Testing of the hypothesis was conducted by

comparing two age groups of adults on a task assessing

social interaction and a test of spatial egocentrism. The

social interaction task required the subjects to place 16

 26

objects in the same, manner on a 4 x 4 matrix without

viewing each other's board. Their results demonstrated

that although the older subjects performed poorer on the

spatial egocentrism task than the younger subjects, the

scores were not related to performance on the social

interaction task. Looft and Charles (1971) suggested that

such results reflect the elderly individual's many years of

experience in communicating with others, in essence,

proposing that elderly individuals rely on the feedback

received during social interaction.

The results obtained by Looft and Charles (1971 )

indicated that the younger adults' performance on a

spatial egocentrism task was better than the older adults'

performance. Their results also indicated that both adult

age groups, utilized in the study, were able to interact

successfully in the structured social situation. It can

also be argued that the obtained results were due to the
structured and simplistic nature of the social interaction

task, which overtly demanded that the participants

exercise perspective-taking skills. By contrast,

naturally occurring behaviors such as during a

conversation, in which perspective-taking is not so

clearly demanded, may be correlated to one's degree of

perspective-taking and success in social interaction.

Thus, previous research and theory suggests a

relationship between perspective-taking and one aspect of

the quality of social interaction, that of

self-disclosure. Support for such a relationship was

 27

indicated by Selman and Selman's (1979) exploratory

investigation of friendship patterns in children, which

indicated that children pass through a number of distinct

stages in their development and understanding of

friendship. During the initial stages of the

investigation, a dilemma was presented to 50 pilot

subjects, in the form of an open-ended, semi-structured

interview, from which six issues important to friendships

among children were identified, A dilemma was then

presented to 93 additional subjects followed by a

flexible series of questions based on the six friendship

issues initially identified. The authors concluded that

there were five sequential stages of • friendship

development, each characterized by a distinct, formal

structure of thought. For example, during the development

and understanding of friendships, a child might progress

from viewing relationships from their own self-interested

point of view to the stage termed Intimate, Mutually Shared

Relationships, which is characterized by perspective-taking

and collaboration with others for mutual and common

interests. In addition, the authors speculated that the

stages of friendship development identified in children may

also apply to the qualitative phases in adult friendship

development. Specifically, perspective-taking may be

related to intimate self-disclosure. The proposed research

will explore this relationship between perspective-taking

and reciprocal self-disclosure in the elderly.

 28

Overview and Hypotheses

The elderly individuals in the present study were

administered a number of tests designed to assess; a)

depression, b) the quantity of social interaction and, c)

the quality of social interaction. Specifically,

depression was assessed by the Zung Self-Rating Depression

Scale (Zung & Durham, 1965). The quantity of social

interaction was assessed by a modified version of Beckman's

(1981) scale designed to assess the subject's reports of

their frequency of social interaction with various groups

of people, and the number of persons he/she talked to the

most. The primary measure of the quality of social

interaction, the subjects' reported intimacy of disclosure

to others and in turn, the others disclosure to the

subject, were determined to enable the identification of

individuals with high intimate reciprocal relationships.

The validity of disclosure was assessed by a modified
version of Jourard and Landsman's (1960) procedure in which

both intimate disclosure and disclosure knowledge are

measured. A secondary measure related to the quality of

social interaction, egocentrism, was assessed by the visual

perspective-taking measure developed by Flavell, Botkin,

Fry, Wright, and Jarvis (1975).

Previous investigators have proposed a negative

relationship between depression and the quantity of social

interaction. Consistent with this hypothesis, researchers

 29

have" found that depression is negatively correlated with

the frequency of social interaction (eg. Green & Monahan,

1982; Larson, 1978). Correspondingly, a negative

correlation between depression and the frequency of social

interaction, particularly with one's peers was expected.

In addition, the validity of one measure of social

interaction, the persons talked to, was also assessed.

Three issues related to the quality of social

interaction were also examined in the present research.

The first issue investigated was the relationship between

depression and the quality of social interaction (eg.

Beckman, 1981; Larson, 1978; Norris et al,, 1983).

Previous investigations have found that depression is

negatively correlated to the quality of social interaction

specifically, in terms of the presence or absence of a

confidant (eg. Norris et al., 1983). One limitation of

previous research, however, has been the subjective nature

of the methods used to assess the presence or the absence

of a confidant. For example, researchers have relied on

the subjects' reports of their confidants, which may be

influenced by the subjects' emotional state. Specifically,

individuals who are depressed are more likely to view

their relationships with others as negative and as a

consequence perceive that others are not sharing their

feelings; hence, they do not have any confidants.

Therefore, a round robin procedure was implemented to

enable the investigation of reciprocal disclosure among a

group of elderly people who were familiar with each other.

 30

The- round robin procedure entailed assessing each“ persons

disclosure to other group members and in turn, their

disclosure to the individual. An additional aim of the

present research was to assess the presence/absence of a

confidant in an objective manner by determining whether

others reciprocated intimate disclosure. This was achieved
by generating a code identifying those individuals with

both high intimacy and high disclosure reciprocity scores.

Following the lead of previous research, it was expected

that intimate reciprocal disclosure would be negatively

correlated with depression.

The second issue assessed in the present research

was the reciprocity of disclosure among the elderly.

Previous research has shown that the disclosure from one

individual is matched by the . disclosure from a second

individual (Perlman & Cozby, 1983). Consistent with this,

Jourard (1959) found that among a group of individuals

familiar with each other, intimate disclosure tended to be

reciprocal. Correspondingly, a positive correlation

between the intimacy of the subject's disclosures and the

intimacy of the target's disclosures was expected.

The third issue examined with respect to the quality

of social interaction, was the validity of

self-disclosure. Jourard and Landsman (1960) indicated

that the validity of self-disclosure could be assessed by

correlating the intimacy of disclosure with an individual's

knowledge of another. Thus, it was expected that the

intimacy of the subject's disclosure to a given target (or

 31

other person) would be*» positively correlated with the

target's knowledge of the subject.

Although previous research has shown that both the

quantity and the quality of social interaction are

correlated with measures of subjective well-being, such as

depression, the relationship between the quantity and the

quality of social interaction has not been assessed.

Therefore, a primary objective of the present research was

to a) independently assess the measures of both the

quantity and the quality of social interaction, and b) to

explore the relationship between these measures.

Looft and Charles (1971) suggested that the losses

often associated with elderly individuals, such as a

reduction in the amount of social interaction, may

contribute to the elderly individual's poorer performance

on tasks assessing egocentrism documented in the

literature. A number of investigations have in turn found

that effective social interaction, as measured in terms of

interpersonal functioning skills, is positively correlated

with an individual's ability to take the perspective of

another (Feffer & Suchotliff, 1966; Marsh et al., 1981).

Therefore, in the present research, it was expected that

the frequency of social interaction would be positively

correlated with perspective-taking.

Previous research has also proposed that the ability

to take the perspective of another may be related to

intimate reciprocal disclosure. Selman and Selman (1979),

for example, indicated that in children both

 32

perspective-taking and intimate reciprocal disclosure are

important dimensions of friendship development. In

addition, previous research has indicated that the

qualitative aspects of an individual's interaction with a

confidant is correlated with the individual's reported

depression (Snow & Crapo, 1982) . Following the lead of

previous research, it was expected that a)

perspective-taking and intimate reciprocal disclosure would

be positively correlated, and b) by that association,

perspective-taking and depression would be negatively

correlated.

The final aim of the present research was to explore

the relationship between gender and intimate disclosure.

Previous research on elderly in the SRO has shown that

patterns of intimate disclosure are not related to gender

(Cohen & Rajkowski, 1982); whereas, research on college

populations have indicated that gender does influence the

level of intimate disclosure (Rubin, 1978),

Method

Subjects

A total of 28 subjects participated in the present

investigation. Five subjects did not complete the study

due to illness, deafness, or disinterest. The remaining 23

subjects included 18 female and 5 male residents of a

rural senior citizens home. The mean age of the male and
 33

female participants were> 84.6 years and 82.2 years,

respectively. Eighteen subjects were widowed, five

subjects were married, and two were single, The two most

frequently cited occupations of either the subject and/or

the spouse were farmer and homemaker.

Measures

The subjects were asked to complete the following

instruments; a) Demographic Information Checklist

(designed by the author), b) Social Interaction Scale

(Beckman, 1981), c) Self-Disclosure Index (Miller et

al., 1983), d) Visual Perspective-Taking (Flavell et al.,

1975), and e) Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (Zung &

Durham, 1965).

The Demographic Information Checklist (shown. in

Appendix A) included questions regarding the subjects

age, gender, marital status, length of widowhood (if

appropriate), former occupation, length of retirement,

education level, current yearly income, self-rated health,

self-rated eyesight, and length of residence in the home.

Social interaction, the second measure (shown in

Appendix B), required the subjects to rate how often they

see or hear from various persons. Eight categories of

people were included; 1) children; 2) neighbors; 3)

confidants (those friends and/or relatives they felt close

enough to that they could talk about anything); 4) other

friends; 5) other relatives; 6) young people they felt

 34

particularly close tc'^ (which may include grandchildren);

7) people they associated with in group activities; 8)

any other people (eg. counselor, lawyer, doctor, or

nurse).

The third measure, the Self-Disclosure Index (shown in

Appendix C), developed by Miller et al. (1983) was used to

assess intimate disclosure. The index consisted of eleven

items designed in such a manner that the stem may be

modified to refer to a specific target person. The

initial 10 items were designed by Miller et al. (1983), the

eleventh item was designed by the author. The subjects

were instructed to respond to each item with one of 5

responses ranging from 1 (discussed not at all) to 5

(discussed fully and completely). The subject's responses

on the scale were indicative of the extent of their

disclosure to a target person.

The Self-Disclosure Index was also used to assess

reciprocal disclosure. Reciprocal disclosure was assessed

by having the identified target person(s) complete the

index (shown in Appendix C). The individual was requested

to indicate the extent of their disclosure to the subject.

A modified version of the index (shown in Appendix D) was

used to assess disclosure knowledge. Disclosure knowledge

was assessed by having the subject complete the scale in

terms of what knowledge he/she had of each target person.

Visual perspective-taking, the fourth measure, was

developed by Flavell et al, (1975). It consists of four

stimulus displays that were individually presented to each

 35

subject. The subjects^ were requested to replicate the

experimenter's view of each display, using materials

identical in size, shape, and color to those of the

stimulus display. The display(s) were placed immediately

in front of the experimenter seated 45 degrees to the

subject's right in the side position, or seated directly

across from the subject in the opposite position.

The fifth measure, the Zung Self-Rating Depression

Scale (shown in Appendix E) (Zung & Durham, 1965) was

designed to measure depression at the time the scale is

administered. The scale consists of 20 items purported to

assess depressive symptomatology in the following areas:

pervasive affect, physiological equivalents or

concomitants, and psychological concomitants. The 20 items

are subdivided such that 10 of the items are stated in a

symptomatically positive manner and 10 items are stated in

a symptomatically negative manner. Four response choices

were available for each item, ranging from "none of the

time" to "all of the time". The subject was asked to

choose the statement within each category that best

describes his/her condition. The subjects were

administered 19 out of the 20 items. (Item 6 was omitted

because the researchers felt that it was too personal to be

included in the present investigation.)

Procedure

A list of the names of potential subjects was prepared

 36

by the matron of the residence, as specified by the

experimenter. The experimenter's specifications required

that the potential subjects speak English as a first

language, and have the ability to see and hear without

difficulty. The experimenter was then introduced to each

subject on the list by a member of the nursing staff.

Following the introduction, a letter providing a brief

description of the proposed study (shown in Appendix F)

was presented to all potential subjects. Individuals

willing to participate in the research project were then
asked to sign a consent form (shown in Appendix G) before

the instruments were presented. The instruments were

presented in two one and one half hour sessions held

approximately one week apart. During the first session

the Demographic Information Checklist, Social Interaction

Scale (Beckman, 1981), and the Self-Disclosure Index

(Miller et al., 1983) were administered. During the

second session, the Visual Perspective-Taking Measure

(Flavell et al., 1975), Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale

(Zung & Durham, 1965), and the modified Self-Disclosure

Index (Miller et al., 1983) were administered.

Before administration of the Self-Disclosure Index,

the subjects were asked to select 4 persons they had

talked to most frequently during the last month. Three of

the selected individuals were to be living within the

residence, and the fourth person could live either inside

or outside of the residence. The nature of this request

led to a modified "Round-Robin" effect, in which at

 37

different points in the study, a subject was often a target

person or correspondingly, a target person was a subject.

Following the completion of the Self-Disclosure Index

(Miller et al., 1983), the experimenter requested the

subject's permission to contact the specified target

person(s) in order to assess reciprocal disclosure. Then,

the complete name and/or telephone number of the target

individual(s) were requested. Target individuals residing

within the residence were contacted and administered the

disclosure index in person by the experimenter. Target

individuals residing outside of the residence were

contacted and administered the disclosure index by

telephone.

Results

Demographic Data

Various measures of demographic data were administered

to the subjects in order to provide a brief description of

the sample population. The means and standard deviations

are presented in Table 1,

Insert Table 1 About Here

 37A

Table 1

Means and Standard Deviations of the

Demographic Characteristics of the Population

Demographic Characteristics Mean Standard Deviation

Length of stay in residence 5.96 4.57

Length of marriage 40.83 18.06

Length of widowhood 10.22 9.57

Number of children 2.30 2.57

Years of education 8.52 2.45

Income 1.61 0.84

Length of retirement 16.91 9.34

Length of spouse's retirement 10.78 10.21

Self-rated health 2.04 0.88

Self-rated eyesight 2.26 1.25

 38

Coding of the Quantity of Social Interaction Measures

Following the lead of Beckman (1981), summary scores

for the various contact groups were generated, so that the

influence of the frequency of social interaction with

specified others could be determined. The first frequency

score was termed the total frequency of social

interaction. It was obtained by calculating a summary

score composed of the number of interactions that would

occur in one year, across the eight person categories.

The second score, the frequency of contact with other

residents, was obtained by calculating a summary score

composed of the number of contacts with fellow residents

that would also occur in one year. The third frequency

score, the frequency of interactions with one's peers or

persons other than one's children or grandchildren, was

determined by calculating a summary score composed of the

number of contacts that would occur in one year with these

persons. Additionally, the subject's were asked to name

the people they "talked to the most", up to a total of 4

people. This category was termed target persons. The

last category, contacted targets, consisted of the number

of target persons contacted by the experimenter to

complete the self-disclosure form.

Coding of the Quality of Social Interaction Measures

Intimacy of Self-Disclosure. One aim of the present

 39

research was to investigate the relationship between

depression and the quality of social interaction. One

measure of the quality of social interaction, the

Self-Disclosure Index (shown in Appendix C) was composed

of eleven items. The subjects responded to each item with

one of five choices; 1 indicated the least amount of

Intimate disclosure and 5 the greatest amount of intimate

disclosure. The subjects completed the scale for ,each

target person specified. The intimacy of the subjects *

disclosure to target individuals was determined by

calculating the overall mean level of the subjects'

reported intimate disclosure. Correspondingly, the sum of

the response choices were divided by the number of test

items and then, by the number of target persons the

subjects reported that they had talked to frequently. The

overall mean level of the intimacy of the target * s

disclosure to the subject(s) was calculated in a similar

manner.

Reciprocal Disclosure. A primary concern of the

present research was to investigate, as objectively as

possible, reciprocal disclosure patterns in the elderly.

The first step in the analysis of reciprocal

disclosure patterns was to determine disclosure

reciprocity, or the degree of similarity between the

subject's level of intimate disclosure and the target

person's level of intimate disclosure. This was obtained

by calculating individual mean(s) for each subject's

intimate disclosure to each target person and each target

 40

person's intimate disclosure to- each' subject. The

respective means of each subject-target pair were then

subtracted from each other, yielding individual

subject-target difference scores. The difference scores

for each subject were-summed, providing a total difference

score, which was then divided by the number of persons that

had added to the score, so that the frequency of social

interaction could be partialled out of the equation. This

result indicated an overall value of matched disclosure.

The scores were then reversed by subtracting the largest

obtained difference score from each individual's matched

disclosure score. Thus, the greater the final score, the
greater the level of disclosure reciprocity.

Intimacy of reciprocal disclosure, the second pattern

of reciprocal disclosure to be investigated, was generated

to reflect those subjects with high levels of intimate

disclosure and high levels of disclosure reciprocity.

Accordingly, intimacy of reciprocal disclosure was

calculated by coding the top third of the sample with high

levels of intimacy of subject disclosure and disclosure

reciprocity scores as 2 (X=1.48 and X-42.13, respectively),

and the remainder of the population as a 1 (X=1.38 and

X=40.21, respectively).

Unique intimacy, the third pattern of reciprocal

disclosure generated, was developed to reflect high levels

of reciprocal intimate disclosure to one unique target

person. This was achieved by generating individual matched

disclosure scores following the procedure used to obtain

 41

overall matched disclosure scores. Unique intimacy was

then determined by coding the top third of the sample

population with the highest mean disclosure to one target

person and the highest matched disclosure of that target

person as a 2, and the remainder of the- population as-a

1.

Cumulative intimacy, the last measure of intimate

disclosure was generated to reflect the maximum or

greatest overall levels of intimate disclosure. Thus,

cumulative intimacy was determined by multiplying the

intimacy of the target's disclosure score by the number of

persons which had contributed to that score.

Coding of the Egocentrism or Perspective-Taking Measure

Visual perspective-taking was scored using the

procedures recommended by Flavell et al. (1975) (shown in

Appendix H). It was possible for a subject to accumulate
a total score of 36 points, where the higher the score the

greater the perspective-taking abilities indicated.

Coding and Status of the Depression Measure

The Zung Self-Rating Depression Scale (SDS) was also

scored according to the method recommended by the authors

(Zung & Durham, 1965). A raw score was calculated by
summing the assigned value of each of the subject's

responses. Thus, the total raw score value ranged between

 42

19 and 76. The raw scores were then converted to the SDS
index which expresses the scores as a decimal that in turn

is used as an indice of the severity of depression. Zung

and Durham (1965) report that the SDS indices for their

control group, consisting of professional staff,

nonprofessional staff, and medical patients of unknown

age, range from 0.25 to 0.43. In addition, Okimoto,

Barnes, Veith, Raskind, Inui, & Carter (1982) state that

the SDS has been validated only in young subjects. Thus,

they suggest that a cut off score of 60 (.75) be used for

research purposes with geriatric medical patients

concerning the detection of clinical depression.

Therefore, the present population falls above the range

found among younger subjects, but below the values found

in geriatric medical patients when clinical depression was

present.

Validity Checks

A check on the measurement of social interaction, the

persons talked to, was conducted. It was based on the

assumption that there is some mutuality in social

conversation, in that the communication of one participant

is reciprocated by another individual. Based on this

premise, validity of the measure was indicated if one

individual reported that he/she talked to a specified

person frequently, and the other person in turn reported

that he/she frequently talked to them as well. Therefore,

 43

the check on the measure of persons frequently talked to

was assessed by determining the percentage of agreement

between the individuals specified by the subject as persons

they talked to most frequently, and the individuals also

specified by the target persons as persons they talked to

most frequently. The obtained percentage of agreement was

63.27%.

A modified version of Jourard and Landsman's (1960)

procedure of assessing the validity of disclosure was used

in the present study. The validity of disclosure was

assessed by determining the correlation between a

subject's intimate disclosure to a target person or

intimacy of disclosure score and what knowledge each target

person had of each subject or disclosure knowledge

score. The obtained correlation was r_ (40) = .15 which,

did not provide evidence of the validity of the measure and

did not support the expected relationship.

Correlational Analyses

The means and standard deviations of the measures of

depression, perspective-taking, quantity of social

interaction, and quality of social interaction are shown

in Table 2.
 44

Insert Table 2 About Here

The correlations among the measures of depression,

perspective-taking, quantity of social interaction, and

quality of social interaction are presented in Table 3.

Insert Table 3 About Here

The present research provided partial support for the

expected negative correlation between depression and the

frequency of social interaction. The results indicated

that depression was negatively correlated with the number

of identified target persons, £ (21) = -.43, £ <.05.

The total frequency of social interaction was used

both as an overall measure of the quantity of social

interaction and was also divided into smaller categories

representing the frequency of social interaction with

fellow residents and one's peers. In addition, the

individuals specified as contacted targets also composed

the target person category. Consequently, a number of

intercorrelations among the quantity of social interaction

measures were both expected and found. Correlations among
the quantity of social interaction measures indicated that
 44A

Table 2

Means and Standard Deviations of Depression,

the Quantity of Social Interaction, the
Quality of Social Interaction, and
Perspective Taking Measures

Measures Mean Standa rd Deviation

Depression

SDS 0.46 0.06

Quantity of Social Interaction

Frequency of social interaction 1648.96 1366.85

Resident 940.83 1010.28
Peers 1368.26 1297.07
Target persons 3.83 0.49
Contacted targets 3.26 0.75

Quality of Social Interaction

Subject overall mean disclosure 1.41 0.41

Target overall mean disclosure 1.55 0.35
Disclosure reciprocity 5.20 2,. 80
Cumulative intimacy 5.05 1.68
Perspective-taking 13.09 5.52
Disclosure knowledge 1.47 0.36

Note: Intimacy of reciprocal disclosure and unique intimacy were

dummy coded such that the top third of the population received a score
of 2 and the remainder a score of one. Thus, the means and standard
deviations of these measures were not included in the table.
 44B
(jn U) ro

li,
CO

14.
13.
)

o Oi -3
Cumulative Intimacy
Perspective-taking O ' O •—I

unique Intimacy
GO —I CD GO
zs -1. 3
to <-h
—E 0 fD fD O O fD O
c+ (/) CO <-l- 3 s fD to 0 r+ 3 GO
O O -J- O -J- r+ to
fD
-$
to
_i. cu Q_
fD
—' 3 —' 3 01 CL 01 —I
OJ o O Cu O O) O c+ fD
■o
O CO CO O to o C+
£= E ^ c «< fD I—t -s

fD -s -s
n> o
-s
O) o
O. fD
-s
3 fD
ci-JO
ro
yo ”h Oi
to
O
fD E
S fD
yo m cn S 3 51i 3
n> n Oi E (O to O O
o -s.
to
cr fD c+‘<
— -a G-J.
X3 -s a> fD o’ O
-s o

Quantity of Social Interaction, the Quality of Social Interaction

O 3 -h
o n

Correlational Matrix Among the Measures of Depression, Gender,

r+
0 -j.
01 r+

ro »—» GJ
ro GJ

and Perspective-Taking
to H-A o
on on ro

)(■ 3f
to to ro on
00 o

ro ro ro ro 4^ on
00 I—* -15» fNJ GJ

on ro ro o GJ
O GJ to on oo

4i.
ro
GJ GJ 00
GJ to 00

ro O 42s. o o ro to
o on GJ on I—* ro ro

I I

on cn ro GJ GJ
on
42. 42i> ro
on
oo 00 -|2> ro

(JO H-* ^ I—* O O H-* o on

ro on to on cn GJ GJ 42. ro

*
on ro (JO ro
on
GO ro
cn
ro ro o
ro on
ro
O GO GJ 00

* I
O -C=>
CAJ
on ro ro ro 1N3
on on o GJ ro ro ro GJ o

o o o O O O ro o
on 4i» on GJ GJ GJ 00 00
 45

the total frequency of social interaction was positively

correlated with: frequency of contact with fellow

residents, r (21) = .95, £ <.01; and frequency of contact

with one's peers, £ (21) = .98, £ <.01. The frequency of

contact with one's peers was also positively correlated

with the frequency of resident contact, £ (21) = .97, £

<.01. In addition, the number of target persons specified

by the subjects, and the number of contacted targets were

positively correlated, r (21) = .50, £ <.05.

One aim of the present study was to explore the

relationship between the quantity and the quality of social

interaction. The results of the present study indicated

that the intimacy of the subjects' disclosures were

positively correlated with: the total frequency of social

interaction, r (21) = .48, £ <.05; and the frequency of

interaction with one's peers, £ (21) = .42, £ <.05. In

addition, the analysis indicated that the intimacy of the

target's disclosure was negatively correlated with the

number of target persons, £ (21) = -.43, £ <.05, and also,

cumulative intimacy was positively correlated with the

number of contacted targets, £ (21) = .72, £ <.01.

A reciprocal relationship between the intimacy of the

subject's disclosure and the intimacy of the target's

disclosure was also expected. However, the results did

not provide support for this relationship, £ (21) = .20.

A number of measures of the quality of social

interaction were generated from the intimacy of subject

disclosure and the intimacy of target disclosure scores.

 46

Consistent with this, a number of intercorrelations among

the quality of social interaction measures were expected.

The results indicated that unique intimacy was positively

correlated with: the intimacy of the subject's disclosure,

£ (21) = .71, £ <.01; and with the intimacy of reciprocal

disclosure, r (21) = .51, ^ <.05. Cumulative intimacy was

positively correlated with the intimacy of target

disclosure, r (21) = .70, £ <.01. A number of

intercorrelations which were not expected were also found.

For example, the intimacy of subject disclosure, £ (21) =

-.51, 2. and the intimacy of target disclosure, r (21)

= -.53, £ <.01 were both negatively correlated with

disclosure reciprocity. In addition, cumulative intimacy

was negatively correlated with both disclosure reciprocity,

r (21) = .56, £ <.01; and the intimacy of reciprocal

disclosure, _r (21) = -.43, £ <.05.

The expected negative correlation between depression

and intimate reciprocal disclosure was not supported.

Contrary to expectations, the results revealed that

depression was positively correlated with intimate

reciprocal disclosure, £ (21) = .52, £ <.05.

The results did not support the expected correlations

between perspective-taking and depression, the total

frequency of social interaction, or intimate reciprocal

disclosure. The correlations were respectively, r (21) =
-.07, r (21) = .08, r (21) = -.06.
In addition, gender was negatively correlated with

disclosure reciprocity, £ (21) = -.42, £ <.05 indicating

 47

that disclosure reciprocity was lower for females than for

males.

Discussion

The results of the present study provide support for

the validity of one measure of social interaction, that of

the persons with whom the subject frequently talks.

Contrary to expectation, the results did not provide

support for the validity of self disclosure; the intimacy

of the subject's disclosure and disclosure knowledge were

not significantly correlated. One interpretation of the

lack of correlation between the intimacy of the subject's

disclosure and disclosure knowledge is that an individual's

knowledge of another may not be solely dependent upon one

individual's- intimate disclosure to another; rather,

others may also disclose information about a given

individual to a third target person,

A number of investigators have suggested that

depression is related to an individual's quantity of

social interaction (Larson, 1978). Studies designed to

assess the proposed relationship have in turn, shown that

depression is negatively correlated to an individual's

frequency of social interaction (eg. Qualls, Justice &

Allen, 1980). The present research provided partial

support for the predicted negative relationship between

depression and the quantity of social interaction. As

expected, depression was negatively correlated to the

 48

number of target persons indicating that higher

self-reported depression is associated with fewer persons

with whom one frequently talks. This result suggests that

depression is negatively related to the presence of others

with whom one can converse.

Past theory and research has also suggested that

depression may be related to the quality of social

interaction (Larson, 1978; Norris et al., 1983).

Investigations have in turn found a negative correlation

between depression and measures of the quality of social

interaction in terms of the presence or absence of a

confidant (Snow & Crapo, 1982). The present study was

designed to avoid the limitations of previous research by

objectively assessing the quality of social interaction.

Unexpectedly, the results indicated that depression was

positively, rather than negatively, correlated to intimate

reciprocal disclosure. This result suggests that the more

depressed an individual is, the greater the likelihood that

the individual's interactions will be characterized by

intimate reciprocal disclosures. This result suggests

that the more depressed an elderly individual is, the more

he/she had in objective terms - confidants. One

interpretation of this result may be that depressed^

individuals are more likely to express personal information

in the form of negative perceptions or complaints to a

second individual, who in turn responds with equally

intimate reciprocal disclosure.
In addition, previous research and theory has shown
 49

that people will typically reciprocate intimate

disclosure, particularly with others familiar to them

(Jourard, 1959). Contrary to previous research, the

results of the present study indicate that the intimacy of

the subject's disclosures and the intimacy of the

target's disclosures were not significantly correlated.

This indicates that intimate disclosure was not met with

reciprocal intimate disclosure, or that the reciprocity of

self-disclosure was not evident in this elderly sample.

This issue should be investigated in future research.

One qualification of the reciprocity of self

disclosure pattern is warranted. The overall mean of the

intimate subjects' disclosure and the intimate targets'

disclosures were respectively, 1.408 and 1.550. The

possible range of the values were from 1 to a maximum of

5. Thus, the obtained level of both subject and target

intimate disclosures were relatively low, indicating that

the areas of intimacy tapped within the scale were

"discussed a little" - and were objectively low in

intimacy. In the present study, the measure of high

intimate disclosure was high intimacy, relative to other

intimate disclosure scores within the elderly group. The

present findings may indicate that little communication

among the elderly is highly intimate.
Previous research has investigated the relationship

between measures of subjective well-being and the quantity

and quality of social interaction. Such investigations

have subsequently shown that depression is negatively

 50

correlated with measures of both the quantity and the

quality of social interaction. An additional objective of

the present research was to explore the relationship

between the measures of the quantity and the quality of

social interaction. The results of the present research

indicate that the intimacy of the subject's, disclosures

were positively correlated with both the total frequency

of social interaction, and more specifically, with the

frequency of social interaction with one's peers. This

result indicates that the more frequently one interacts

with others, the greater the intimacy of one's

disclosures. The results also indicate that the intimacy

of the target's disclosures were negatively correlated with

the number of target persons, and that cumulative intimacy

was positively correlated with the number of contacted

targets. The lack of a significant correlation between

cumulative intimacy and the number of target persons

suggests that this latter correlation is artifactual.

Looft and Charles (1971) proposed that the ability to

take the perspective of another was related to the

individual's quantity of social interaction. Consequent

investigations have shown that perspective-taking is

positively correlated with an individual's frequency of

social interaction (Feffer & Suchotliff, 1966; Marsh et

al., 1981). In addition, previous research and theory

has led to a proposed relationship between depression, the

quality of social interaction, and perspective-taking
(Norris et al., 1983). The present study did not support
 51

the expected relationships between perspective-taking and

the measures of depression, the quantity, or the quality

of social interaction. The failure to find a significant

correlation between visual perspective-taking and the

measures of depression, the quantity of social interaction,

and the quality of social interaction suggests that a

battery of perspective-taking measures may be more useful

in assessing perspective-taking in the elderly, than the

use of only one such measure.

The present research explored the relationship between

gender and patterns of self-disclosure. Past

investigations have found that female college students

disclose more than male college students (Jourard &

Lasakow, 1958); whereas, Cohen and Rajowski (1982) found

that gender distinctions regarding the recipient of

intimate disclosure did not apply to the elderly in the

SRO. The negative correlation between gender and

disclosure reciprocity indicates that males are more

reciprocal in their interactions than females. This

result should be considered cautiously, due to the small

number of male subjects in the present study.

 52

References

Altman, I., & Taylor, D.A. (1973) Social penetration: The

development of interpersonal relationships. New

York: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston.

American Psychiatric Association. (1980). Diagnostic and

statistical manual of mental disorders (3rd ed.).

Washington, D.G.: APA.

Archer, R.L., & Berg, J.H. (1978) Disclosure reciprocity

and its limits: A reactance analysis. Journal of

Experimental Social Psychology, 14, 527-540.

Beckman, L.J. (1981) Effects of social interaction and

children's relative inputs on older women's

psychological well-being. Journal of Personality and

Social Psychology, 41, 1075-1086.

Bielby, D., & Papalia, D.E. (1975) Moral development and

perceptual role-taking egocentrism: Their

development and interrelationship across the life

span. International J ournal of Aging and Human

Development, 6, 293-307.
Brewer, M.B., & Mittelman, J. (1980) Effects of normative

control of self-disclosure on reciprocity. J ournal

of Personality, 48, 89-102.

Busse, E., & Pfeiffer, E. (1973) Mental Illness in Later

Life. Washington, D.C.: American Psychiatric

Association.

Busse, E.W., & Wang, H.S. (1974) The multiple factors

contributing to dementia in old age: Normal aging.

 53

Durham, NC: Duke University Press.

Chelune, G.J., Sultan, F.E., & Williams, C.L. (1980)

Loneliness, self-disclosure, and interpersonal

effectiveness. Journal of Counseling Psychology, 27,

462-468.
Chiriboga, D.A. (1982) Adaptation to marital separation in

later and earlier life. Journal of Gerontology, 37,

109-114.

Cohen, C.I., & Rajkowski, H. (1982) What's in a Friend?

Substantive and theoretical issues. The

Gerontologist, 22, 261-266.

Cohen, C.I., & Sokolovsky, J. (1980) Social engagement

versus isolation: The case of the aged in SRO

hotels. The Gerontologist, 20, 36-44.

Conner, K.A,, & Powers, E.A. (1975) Structural effects and

life satisfaction among the aged. International

J ournal of Aging and Human Development, 6, 321-327.

Cowan, P.A. (1966) Cognitive egocentrism and social

interaction in children. American Psychologist, 21,

623.

Cozby, P.C. (1972) Self-disclosure, reciprocity, and

liking. Sociometry, 35, 151-160.

Cummings, E.M., & Henry, W. (1961) Growing old. New

York: Basic Books.

Davis, J.D. (1976) Self-disclosure in an acquaintance

exercise: Responsibility for level of intimacy.

J ournal of Personality and Social Psychology, 33,

787-792
 54

Epstein; L.J. (1976 ) Depression in* the elderly. Journal

of Gerontology, 31, 278-282.

Feffer, M., & Suchotliff, L. (1966) Decentering

implications of social interactions. J ournal of

Personality and Social Psychology^ 4, 415^422.

Flavell, J.H. (1970) Cognitive changes in adulthood. In

L.R. Goulet & P.B. Baltes (Eds.) Life-span

developmental psychology; Theory and research. (pp.

248-253). New York; Academic Press.

Flavell, J.H., Botkin, R.T., Fry, C.L., Wright, J.W., &

Jarvis, P.E. (1975) The development of role-taking and

communication skills in children. New York; Wiley.

Gouldner, A.W. (1960) The norm of reciprocity; A

preliminary statement. American Sociological Review,

25, 161-179.

Greene, V.L., & Monahan, D. (1982) The impact of

visitation on patient well-being in nursing homes.

The Gerontologist, 22, 418-423.

Gurland, B.J. (1976) The comparative frequency of

depression in various adult age groups. J ournal of

Gerontology, 31, 283-292.

Harel, Z. (1979) Discriminating between survivors and

non-survivors among working class aged living in the

community. The Gerontologist, 19, 83-89.

Harel, Z. (1982) Predictors of mental health among

semi-rural aged. The Gerontologist, 22, 499-504.

Havlghurst, R.J., & Albrecht, R. (1953) Older people. New

York; Longmans Green.

 55

Havighursf, R.J., Neugarten,' B.L., & Tobin, S.S. (1968)

Disengagement and patterns of aging. In B.L.

Neugarten (ed.) Middle Age and Aging. (PP.

161-172), Chicago: University of Chicago Press,

Jourard, S.M, (1959) Self-disclosure and other-catHexis.

Journal of Abnormal Social Psychology, 59 , 428-431.

Jourard, S.M. (1961) Self-disclosure scores and grades in

nursing college. Journal of Applied Psychology, 45,

244-247.

Jourard, S.M., & Landsman, M.J. (1960) Cognition, cathexis,

and the 'dyadic effect' in men's self-disclosing

behavior. Merri11-Palmer Quarterly, 6, 178-186.

Jourard, S.M,, & Lasakow, P. (1958) Some factors in

self-disclosure. Journal of Abnormal Social

Psychology, 56, 91-98.

Larson, R. (1978) Thirty years of research on the

subjective well-being of older Americans. Journal of

Gerontology, 33, 109-125,

Lemon, B.W., Bengtson, V.L., & Peterson, J.A. (1972) Art

exploration of the activity theory of aging:

Activity types and life satisfaction among in-movers

to a retirement community. Journal of Gerontology,

27, 511-523.

Leviton, D,, & Santa Maria, L. (1979) The adults health

and developmental program: Descriptive and

evaluative data. The Gerontologist, 19, 534-543.

Looft, W.R. (1972) Egocentrism and social interaction

across the life span. Psychological Bulletin, 78,

 56

73-92.

Looft, W.R., & Charles, D.C. (1971) Egocentrism and

social interaction in young and old adults. Aging

and Human Development, 2, 21-28.

Maddox, G.L. (1965) Fact and artfact: Evidence bearing

on disengagement theory from the Duke Geriatrics

Project. Human Development, 8, 117-130.

Maddox, G.L. (1968) Persistence of life style among the

elderly: A longnitudinal study of patterns of social

activity in relation to life satisfaction. In B.L,

Neugarten (Ed.), Middle Age and Aging. (pp.

181-183). Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Maddox, G., & Eisdorfer, C. (1962) Some correlates of

activity and morale among the elderly. Social

Forces, 40, 254-260.

Markides, K.S., & Martin, H.W, (1979) A causal model of

life satisfaction among the elderly. J ournal of

Gerontology, 14, 86-93.

Marsh, D.T., Serafica, F.C., & Barenboim, C. (1981)

Interrelationships among perspective-taking,

interpersonal problem solving and interpersonal

functioning. J ournal of Genetic Psychology, 138,

37-48.

Miller, L.C., Berg, J.H., & Archer, R.L. (1983) Openers:

Individuals who elicit intimate self-disclosure.

Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 44,

1234-1244.

Murray, R., Huelskoetter, M.M., & O'Driscoll, D. (1980)

 57

The nursing process in later maturity. Englewood

Cliffs: Prentice-Hall Inc.

Muuss, R.E. (1982) Social cognition: David Elkind's

theory of adolescent egoctrism. Adolescence, 17,
249-265.

Neugarten, B.L., Havighurst, R.J., & Tobin, S.S. (1968)

Personality and patterns of aging. In B.L. Neugarten

(Ed.) Middle Age and Aging. (pp. 173-177).

Chicago; University of Chicago Press.

Norris, J.E., Rubin, K.H., Cohen, J., & Both, L. (1983,

October) Assessing qualitative dimensions of adult

social interaction; Examining peer relationships.

Paper presented at the meeting of the Canadian

Association on Gerontology, Moncton, New Brunswick.

Okimoto, J.T., Barnes, R.F., Veith, R.C., Raskind, M.A.,

Inui, T.S., & Carter, W.B. (1982) Screening for

Depression in Geriatric Medical Patients. American

Journal of Psychiatry, 139, 799-802.

Perlman, D., Gerson, A.C., & Spinner, B. (1978)

Loneliness among senior citizens; An empirical

report. Essence, 2, 239-248.

Pfeiffer, E., & Busse, E.W. (1973) Mental disorders in

later life Affective disorders; Paranoid, Neurotic,

and Situational Reactions. In E.W. Busse & E.

Pfeiffer (Eds.) Mental illness in later life. (pp.

107-144). Washington; American Psychiatric

Association.
Piaget, J. (1950) The psychology of intelligence. New
 58

York: Harcourt Brace.

Qualls, P.E., Justice, B., & Allen, R.E. (1980) Isolation

and psychosocial functioning. Psychological Reports,

46, 279-285.

Rubin, K.H. (1973) EgoGentrism in childhood: A unitary

construct? Child Development, 44, 102-110.

Rubin, K.H. (1974) The relationship between spatial and

communicative egocentrism in children and young and

old adults. Journal of Genetic Psychology, 125,

295-301.
Rubin, K.H., Attewell, P.W., Tierney, M.C., & Tumolo, P.

(1973) Development of spatial egocentrism and

conservation * across the life span. Developmental

Psychology, 9, 432.

Rubin, Z. (1975) Disclosing oneself to a stranger:

Reciprocity and its limits. Journal of Experimental

Social Psychology, 11, 233-260.

Rubin, Z. (1978) Friendship, proximity, and

self-disclosure. Journal of Personality, 46, 1-22.

Selman, R.L., & Selman, A.P. (1979) Children's ideas about

friendship: A new theory. Psychology Today, 13,

71-81, 114.

Snow, R., & Crapo, L. (1982) Emotional bondedness,

subjective well-being and health in elderly medical

patients. Journal of Gerontology, 37, 609-615.

Silverman, C. (1968) The epidemiology of depression.

Baltimore: John Hopkins Press.

Solano, C.H., Batten, P.G., & Parish, E.A. (1982)

 59

Loneliness and patterns of self-disclosure. Journal

of Personality and Social Psychology, 43, 524-531.

Taylor, D.A. (1968) The development of interpersonal

relationships: Social penetration processes. Journal
of Social Psychology, 75, 79-90.

Tesch, S., Whitbourne, S.K., & Nehrke, M.F. (1978)

Cognitive egocentrism in institutionalized adult

males. Journal of Gerontology, 33, 546-552.

Weeks, D.G., & Bragg, M.E. (1980) Relation between

loneliness and depression: A structural equation

analysis. Journal of Personality and Social

Psychology, 39, 1238-1244.

Zung, W.W., & Durham, N.C. (1965) A self-rating

depression scale. Archives of General Psychiatry, 12,

63-70.
 60

APPENDIX A

Demographic Information
 61

Demographic Information

1. Gender: 1. male
2. female

2. How long have you been living at (residen

3. years old are you:

How

4, Are you 1. single

2. married
3. widowed
4. divorced or separated

5, a) How many times have you been married?

b) How long were you married? 1st marriage
2nd marriage
c) How long have you been widowed or alone?
d) How many children did you have?

6. Where did you live during most of your ad

a) city or town
b) province

7. What was your former occupation? .

8, If married, what was the occupation of your spouse?

9. What is the highest education level you a

Year
Province

10. What is your current yearly income:

1. less than $5000
2. $6000 - $10,000
3. $11,000 - $15,000
4. $16,000 - $20,000 ____
5. Above $20,000

11. How long have you been retired (if employ

If employed, how long has your spouse been retired?

 62

12 . How-would you rate your health

5. extremely good
4. very good .
3. healthy
2. very poor
1. extremely poor

13. How would you rate your eyesight

5. extremely good _____
4. very good
3. average
2. very poor .
1. extremely poor ______
 63

APPENDIX B

Quantity of Social Interaction Scale

 64

Quantity of Social Interaction Scale

"how often do you usually see or hear from":

less than once twice once twice Daily

once a month a month a month a week a week

Category 1:

children

3
4

Category 2;

neighbors

Category 3;

confidants

Category 4:

other friends

1
 65

Category 5:

other relatives

Category 6;

young people

Category 7:

group activities

Category 8:

others

3
 66

APPENDIX C

Self-Disclosure Index

(Disclosure-Output)
 67

Self-Disclosure Index

(Disclosure-Output)

"Indicate the extent to which you have discussed the

following with: Target 1; Target 2; Target 3; and

Target 4."

Discussed Discussed Discussed Discussed Discussed

not at a little some a lot fully
all and
completely

1 2 3 4 5
(Inside) (Outside)

12 3 4

01. My personal habits

02. Things I have done which I feel guilty about

03. Things I wouldn't do in public

04. My deepest feelings

05. What I like and dislike about myself

06. What is important to me in life

07. What makes me the person I am

08. My worst fears

09. Things I have done which I am proud of

10. My close relationships with other people

11. Things I have done in the past

 68

APPENDIX D

Self-Disclosure Index
(Disclosure Knowledge)
 69

Self-Disclosure- Index
(Disclosure Knowledge)

"Indicate the the extent to which you know the

following information about Target 1; Target 2; Target

3; Target 4"

Know Know Know Know Know

nothing a little some a lot fully and
at all completely

1 2 3 4 5

(Inside) (Outside)

12 3 4

01. His/her personal habits

02. Things he/she has done which he/she feels guilty about

03. Things he/she wouldn't do in public

04. His/her deepest feelings

05. What he/she likes and dislikes about his/herself

06. What is important to his/her in life

07. What makes he/she the person he/she is

08. His/her worst fears

09. Things he/she has done which he/she is proud of

10. His/her close relationships with other people

11 . Things he/she has done in the past

 70

APPENDIX E

Self-Rating Depression Scale

 71

Self-Rating Depression Scale■

none or some a good most or

a little of the part of all of
of the' time time the time the time
1 2 3 4

1 2 3 4

01 I feel downhearted and blue.

02 Morning is when I feel the best.

03 I have crying spells or feel like itc

04 I have trouble sleeping at night.

05. I eat as much as I used to.

06. I still enjoy sex.

07. I notice that I am losing weight.

08. I have trouble with constipation.

09. My heart beats faster than usual.

10. I get tired for no reason.

11. My mind is as clear as it used to be.

12. I find it easy to do the things I used

to do.

13. I am restless and can't keep still.

14. I feel hopeful about the future.

15. I am more irritable than usual.

16. I find it easy to make decisions.

17. I feel that I am useful and needed.

18. My life is pretty full.

19. I feel that others would be better off

if I were dead.

20. I still enjoy the things I used to do.

 72

APPENDIX F

Letter of Introduction
 73

Hello,

I am a student at Lakehead University. I am looking

for people to volunteer 2-3 hours of their time to

participate in a,survey which I must carry out in order to

graduate from university. The survey would consist of 2 or

3 visits which may be scheduled at your convenience

anytime between July 30th and September 30, 1984. The

survey is on conversation between people.

The kind of questions I would be asking in the survey

are: How you are feeling, how often you see or hear from

other people, what kind of things you talk to your friends

about and what your friends talk to you about (these are

very general questions). I would also ask you to give me

the names of a few friends so I could ask them what they

talk to you about as well. I would also ask you to do a

few short tasks taking a total of 10 or 15 minutes.

What is said during our visits will not be reported to

anyone on an individual basis. The results of the survey

will be reported to my instructors on a group basis only.

I really need your help to complete my school work;

So, if you are interested in volunteering your help, please

leave your name at the desk and I will contact you.

Sincerely,

Jocelyne Hamel
 74

APPENDIX G

Letter of Consent
 75

Letter of Consent

I agree to participate in the study being conducted by

Jocelyne Hamel.

I understand that all information will be

confidential. The results of the study will be released
on a group basis only.

Signature

Witness
 APPENDIX H

Perspective-Taking Instructions and Scoring

 77

Perspective^Taking Instructions and Scoring Key

Instructions:

"I'm going to sit here and look at the block very

carefully. Now I'm going to give you some
instructions about what to do with your block and
I'd like you to listen very carefully. And then,
when I've finished I'd like you to say them back
to me in your own words. Now take your block and
put it on the paper there next to you so that it
looks to you, there, just as this block looks to
me, here, so that you see on your block just what
I see on my block."

Now I'm sitting in a different place and looking

at the block from here. Put your block on the
paper so it looks to you, there, just as this
block looks to me, here.

Perspective-Taking Scoring Key

Display 1:

Side Position:

3 configuration correct on first attempt

2 incorrect on first attempt, but correct on second attempt

(that is, after going over to look from E's position)

0 incorrect on first attempt, and the second arrangement is

the egocentric, S-perspective one

1 incorrect on first attempt, and the second arrangement is

any other incorrect one

Opposite Position:

Where S had "used up" his second attempt in the previous sub-
task :
 78

3 correct

1 miscellaneous (that is, incorrect but nonegocentric)

0 egocentric

Where S still had a second attempt available to him:

3 correct on first attempt

2 correct on second attempt

1 miscellaneous on second attempt

0 egocentric on second attempt

Display 2
(both subtasks)

4 configuration correct

1 miscellaneous

0 egocentric

Display 3

(both subtasks)

5 both configuration and height correct

4 configuration correct, L cylinder properly placed, but M

and H cylinders incorrectly placed, relative to each
other, on either the right-left or the front-back (or
both) dimensons

configuration correct but height "more incorrect" than in

4

2 configuration incorrect but height correct or partly

correct (that is, correct ordering of cylinders on either
right-left or front-back dimension but not both

1 miscellaneous

0 egocentric (both in configuration and in height)

 79

Display 4

(both subtasks)

6 configuration and color correct, and height at least

partly correct
5 configuration correct, height at least partly correct,
but color only partly correct (ie., only two of the three
cylinders properly oriented as regards color)

4 configuraton correct, and either height or color (not

both) at least partly correct

3 either of the following: (a) configuration correct but

neither height nor color even partly correct,
(b) configuration incorrect but both height and color at
least partly correct
2 configuration incorrect, but either height or color (not
both) at least partly correct
1 miscellaneous

0 egocentric (in configuration, height, and color)