Self-perceived outcomes of informative and apologetic self-disclosure: A mixed methods study.

PURPOSE: Self-disclosure statements that are informative, rather than apologetic, have been demonstrated to improve listener perceptions of adults who stutter (Byrd et al., 2017). The purpose of the present study is to investigate the benefits of self-disclosure from the perspective of the speaker and to determine whether self-disclosure statement type is associated with self-perceived outcomes of use.

METHOD: A total of 156 adults who stutter completed a survey adapted from a previous study investigating affective, behavioral, and cognitive outcomes of voluntary stuttering. Survey responses were analyzed using descriptive and inferential statistics to determine if there was a significant relationship between self-disclosure statement type and self-reported outcomes. Additionally, responses to two open-ended questions relating to timing of self-disclosure and self-disclosure experiences in general were analyzed using reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS: Self-disclosure was perceived as beneficial in at least one context by 96.8 % of respondents. Respondents who used an informative self-disclosure statement were more likely to agree that self-disclosure increased confidence and were less likely to report attempting to conceal or avoid stuttering than respondents who used an apologetic self-disclosure statement. Themes relating to additional aspects of self-disclosure experiences included personalized use, social connection, acceptance of stuttering, challenging cognitive distortions, communication is easier, self-empowerment, humor, voluntary stuttering, and vulnerability to prejudice.

CONCLUSION: Similar to studies investigating the influence of self-disclosure on listener perceptions, informative self-disclosure is associated with greater self-perceived benefits than apologetic self-disclosure for adults who stutter.