final ppt_mendoza & magno

8/9/2019 Final Ppt_Mendoza & Magno

http://slidepdf.com/reader/full/final-pptmendoza-magno 1/33

SONIA MENDOZA

CARLO MAGNO



` Self-disclosure is the process of making the self

known to another person (Jourard, 1958)

` One makes him/herself manifest in thinking andfeeling through actions (Chelune, Skiffington

&Williams, 1981).



1. Personal matters

2. Thoughts and ideas

3. Religion

4. Work, study & accomplishments

5. Sex



6. Interpersonal relationship

7. Emotional state

8. Tastes

9. Problems



Jourard (1971) noted that persons need it:

1. To get in touch with real selves

2. To have intimate relationship with people

3. To bond with others in pursuit of the trust of one¶s being

4. To direct the destiny on the basis of knowledge



1. We learn the extent to which we are similar,and the extent to which we differ from oneanother in thoughts, feelings, hopes andreactions to the past.

2. We learn of other person¶s needs enabling usto help him/her to ensure that his/her needswill be met.

3. We learn the extent to which a person accords

with or deviates from moral and ethicalstandards.



To develop an instrument for self-disclosure which is

important:

1. In the counseling process2. For individual to find out what areas in his/her life

have been easy to share and what areas need

more revelations



Participants were 55 females, 16-22 yearsold students from different colleges of DLSU

Search for Content Domain` it indicated the person to whom one usually

discloses` the topic disclosed

` the situation where one discloses` how one discloses` Characteristics while disclosing` The rate of their own self disclosing habit



The self-disclosure questionnaire by Sydney

Jourard and Rubin and Shenkers intimacy of self-

disclosure was reviewed on how they came up

with their items and factors for the present scale.



` Based on the survey, 114 items under nine factors

were constructed and the verbal frequency scale

was used. Three professionals reviewed the

items, deleted and added more before the pre-tryout form was constructed.



Ten selected respondents (6 females and 4

males) used the pre-try out forms and were

asked to provide feedback for further revisions.

The form consisted of 110 item w/ nine

factors, 6 were negative and the rest were

positive items. The scaling used was the verbal

frequency scale because the test was ameasure of a habit. The order of item were

randomly arranged.



The factors were sex (5 items), problems, (21

items) interpersonal relationship (17 items),

accomplishments/work/study (14 items), tastes

(8items) and personal matters (20 items). Thescaling used was the verbal frequency scale

(always, often, sometimes, rarely, never).



To develop the main tryout form, comments on

the pre-tryout form were considered. The main

tryout form is now 112 items. The scale was

intended for adolescents since items wereempirically based on adolescent respondents and

reflected their usual activities. There were six

negative items. The scaling used was verbal

frequency scale.



There were 100 respondents from private

school. 48 male and female, 4th year high

school, ages ranged from 15-16.The rest of

participants were college students from DLSU.The sampling design was purposive. During the

administration of scale, the researcher explained

the purpose of study. It took 20 minutes to

answer the scale. The data were reviewed after the collection. Each test was scored and

encoded.



The 112 items were intercorrelated and the

factors were extracted using the principal

components analysis. A correlation matrix was

made among the factors. The reliability wasobtained using the Cronbach¶s alpha. The items

were grouped using Principal Components

Analysis.



In the final form, there were 60 items

accepted; 62 items deleted in the item analysis

due to low factor loadings (below .40). There were

5 factors extracted in the Principal Components Analysis: beliefs, relationships, personal matters,

interests, and intimate feelings.



A norm was used to interpret the scores. The

test was scored based on the corresponding

answer on each item. A score was arrived at a

particular factor. The raw score had an equivalentpercentile based in the norm, and a corresponding

percentile had a remark.



There was no allotted time to answer the

scale. The respondents were instructed to shade

their answers. No right or wrong answers, just

respond as honestly as possible.



The answer Always was equivalent to 5 points,

Often is 4points, Sometimes is 3, Rarely is 2 and

Never is 1 point. All items were positive because

all the negatrive items were removed during theitem analysis due to low factor loadings. The score

on each item was summated and there was an

equivalent percentile for a particular score.



The garnered percentile had a remark of highfrequency, average frequency and low frequency.

A low disclosing individual would mean that theparticular person never or rarely opens up to others on

the particular topic.

An average self-disclosing individual would meanthat the particular person has opened up in generalterms about a particular matter only when necessary andon selected others on a particular topic.

A high self-disclosing individual would mean that theperson has opened up, shared fully and gave completedetails to others about a particular topic. The individual has the tendency to let self beknown in all dimensions of his/her being.



The corrected item-total correlation of the 62 items

as a total correlation is above .30. The item total

correlation of accepted items range from .48 to

.30, the item correlation of the deleted itemsranges from -.01 to .29. The coefficient alpha

reliability is .91, the standard item alpha is .91



A correlation matrix was made on the 112 items, themean for the inter-item correlation is .34, the varianceis 1821.38, and the standard deviation is 42.68. Thehighest inter-correlation of items is .65 that occurred

between item numbers 51 and 74.

In the process of factor analysis, the hypothesized 9factors were extracted into 18 factors with aneigenvalue of 1.08 the researchers considered 4% of

variance which offers 5 factors.



Valid N Mean Confidence

Confiden

ce Std.Dev. Standard

-95.00% 95.00% Error

Beliefs 200 3.26 3.19 3.32 0.48 0.03

Relations

hips 200 3.29 3.22 3.35 0.46 0.03

Personal

Matters 200 3.26 3.20 3.32 0.41 0.03

Interests 200 3.34 3.27 3.40 0.48 0.03

Intimate

feelings 200 3.26 3.20 3.33 0.47 0.03



` Cronbach¶s alpha whole scale =.94 Beliefs = .76

Relationships = .71

Interest = .65

Personal Matters = .77

Intimate Feelings =.61



Beliefs

elati s

i s

ers al

atters I terests

I ti ate

f eeli gs

Beliefs

elati s

i s 0.41

ers al

atters 0.46 0.65I terests 0.32 0.73 0.63

I ti ate

f eeli gs 0.41 0.57 0.63 0.56



Parameter Standard T Prob.

Estimate Error Statistic Level(relations)-121-

(Beliefs) 0.87 0.07 13.36 0.00

(interest)-122-

(Beliefs) 0.69 0.08 9.10 0.00

(persMat)-123-

(Beliefs) 1.00 0.00 25.00 0.00

(intfeel)-124-

(Beliefs) 0.94 0.06 14.92 0.00

(interest)-125-

(relations) 1.00 0.00 25.00 0.00

(persMat)-126-

(relations) 0.90 0.05 19.67 0.00

(intfeel)-127-

(relations) 0.85 0.05 16.22 0.00

(persMat)-128-

(interest) 0.99 0.04 22.73 0.00

(intfeel)-129-

(interest) 0.89 0.05 16.70 0.00

(intfeel)-130-

(persMat) 0.97 0.05 21.23 0.00



Value

Discrepancy Function 15.112

Maximum Residual

Cosine 0

Maximum AbsoluteGradient 0.1

ICSF Criterion 0

ICS Criterion 0

ML C i-Square 00 . 22

Degrees of Freedom 1 00p-level 0

RMS Standardized

Residual 0.086



Lower 90% Point Upper 90%

Conf. Bound Estimate Conf. Bound

Population

Noncentrality

Parameter 8.368 9.205 10.08

Steiger-Lind RMSEA

Index 0.07 0.074 0.077

McDonald

Noncentrality Index 0.006 0.01 0.015

Population Gamma

Index 0.748 0.965 0.782

Adjusted

Population Gamma

Index 0.729 0.947 0.765



After the step by step processes were analyzed andconsidered, new factors were arrived at after factor analysis. The items were re-classified and were givennew names. Only 5 factors were accepted following the4% rating of the eigen value. These factors were Beliefs,Relationships, Interests, Personal Matters, and IntimateFeelings. The test developed was intended to measurethe self-disclosure each person made on different areasor factors.



` The test has been reviewed by experts and factor

analyzed. It has internal consistency of .91 which

is high.



` Since the scale has just underwent its initial

stages, further validation study should be done to

conduct further validation and reliability studies.

Norming and interpretation for the test needsfurther establishment. There is a need to

administer this to a larger sample size.



` An intensive study should be made with

considerable and appropriate number of

respondents. In terms of sampling, a probabilistic

technique is suggested to account for further generalization in the study because the current

test only used a purposive non-probabilistic

sampling.



Have a nice day!

final ppt_mendoza & magno

Documents