The disclosure processes model: Understanding disclosure decision-making and post-disclosure outcomes among people living with a concealable stigmatized identity

By Stephenie R. Chaudoir, J. Fisher. Psychological bulletin, 2010

849 citations recorded by the source corpus.

Disclosure is a critical aspect of the experience of people who live with concealable stigmatized identities. This article presents the Disclosure Processes Model (DPM)— a framework that examines when and why interpersonal disclosure may be beneficial. The DPM suggests that antecedent goals representing approach and avoidance motivational systems moderate the effect of disclosure on numerous individual, dyadic, and social contextual outcomes and that these effects are mediated by three distinct processes: (1) alleviation of inhibition, (2) social support, and (3) changes in social information. Ultimately, the DPM provides a framework that advances disclosure theory and identifies strategies that can assist disclosers in maximizing the likelihood that disclosure will benefit well-being.

Subfields: Social Psychology

View Paper: https://www.semanticscholar.org/paper/3dcf639e7f69e947763dec838fdb383793ded73f

How researchers see this paper

The researchers whose trusted networks rank it highest, strongest advocate first. Every researcher gets a different order.

In Social Psychology

Citations in the corpus

University student perspectives on institutional non-disclosure of disability and learning challenges: reasons for staying invisible (2019, background): “The literature suggests that non-disclosure is often associated with students avoiding negative outcomes rather than having a focus on positive goals such as improved academic success (Chaudoir and Fisher 2010).”
Disability in the Workplace (2016, background): “Other cited disclosure motivations are a need for accommodations, desire to make a supervisor aware of potential disability symptoms that could be misinterpreted (Ellison et al., 2003; Madaus, 2008), or for the benefit of others (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010).”
Toward a Social Psychology of Authenticity: Exploring Within-Person Variation in Autonomy, Congruence, and Genuineness Using Self-Determination Theory (2019, background): “Additionally, it is not just whether individuals are out or not that is important; there is variation also in the level of openness and comfort discussing identity-relevant topics across different relationships and contexts (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010; Mohr & Fassinger, 2000).”
Psychological development and educational problems of left-behind children in rural China (2015, background): “LBC’s communication with parents and children’s level of disclosure with parents appears to facilitate LBC receiving social support, which enhances healthy emotional adaptation (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010).”
Coming Out as Lesbian, Gay, or Bisexual: The Lasting Impact of Initial Disclosure Experiences (2015, background): “Moreover, the mechanism by which positive or negative reactions impact well-being have not been well-studied (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010; but see Chaudoir & Quinn, 2010 for an exception) and few studies examine specific disclosure events, with most aggregating across multiple experiences (e.g., Beals…”
Hidden costs of hiding stigma: Ironic interpersonal consequences of concealing a stigmatized identity in social interactions (2014, background): “…of issues of acceptance for individuals living with stigmatized identities (e.g., Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010; Goffman, 1963; Rodriguez & Kelly, 2006), existing empirical work has not directly examined belonging and acceptance in interpersonal interactions (as noted by Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010).”
Negative Parental Responses to Coming Out and Family Functioning in a Sample of Lesbian and Gay Young Adults (2015, background): “…importance of parents as a source of social support (Heatherington and Lavner 2008), economic independence (Gardner et al. 2014), availability of other sources of support (Chaudoir and Fisher 2010), and individuals’ assessment of the cost/benefit for themselves and for their parents (Green 2000).”
Understanding Social Media Disclosures of Sexual Abuse Through the Lenses of Support Seeking and Anonymity (2016, methodology): “We coded for disclosure content based on the DPM model [12] discussed above.”
Sensitive Self-disclosures, Responses, and Social Support on Instagram: The Case of #Depression (2017, methodology): “After all the data was coded, the first author grouped these codes into larger conceptual categories using Rimé’s framework and the Disclosure Processes Model as conceptual lenses (Table 1).”
Experiences with Misgendering: Identity Misclassification of Transgender Spectrum Individuals (2015, background): “Disclosing a concealed stigmatized identity requires careful consideration of the audience and the situation (e.g., Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010; Pachankis, 2007).”
Barriers and responses to the disclosure of non-suicidal self-injury: a thematic analysis (2018, background): “…is important to understand and promote the aspects of NSSI disclosure responses that young adults have found helpful, we know from the broader disclosure literature that supportive responses to personal disclosures have been found to positively affect discloser wellbeing (Chaudoir & Fisher, 2010).”