From Bed to the Web:

A Systematic Review Comparing Offline and Online Sexual

Self-disclosure

Retno Setyaningsih

1,2

, M. G. Bagus Ani Putra

Faculty of Psychology, Universitas Airlangga

Department of Psychology, Universitas Islam Sultan Agung

Keywords : Relationship Satisfaction, Sexual Risk Behaviour.

Abstract : Sexual self-disclosure is one of the most intimate self-disclosure, but the content is culturally stigmatized as

a taboo not to be communicated in a public area. Sexual self-disclosure is common in the romantic

relationship context, and believed to be related with relationship satisfaction. This systematic review

examined existing research to compare offline and online sexual self-disclosure. The aim of this review was

to compare the theoretical background, pattern, role, antecedent factors and outcome of sexual self-

disclosure between offline and online situations. Although there are significant differences between offline

and online patterns of sexual self-disclosure, both may be used as intrumental tools for maintaining the

relationship and in turn lead to relationship satisfaction. Compared with men, women are more restrained

about discussing sexual topics in both situations, perhaps due to cultural influence. In an online context,

sexual self-disclosure also has a strong relationship with offline sexual risk behavior.

1 INTRODUCTION

Self-disclosure in an interpersonal relationship has

an important role. From the perspective of social

penetration theory, a more intimate relationship

leads to greater willingness to open much more

personal information (Altman and Taylor, 1973).

People will also be more open to people who are

liked, and people will love other parties who want to

be more open, so that in this case reciprocity in the

process of self-disclosure becomes important

(Collins and Miller, 1994). Self-disclosure is an

important social psychology variable as it relates to

one's mental health. People who know themselves

and are able to open themselves are spared from

neurotic symptoms, but many can’t do this due to

various factors (Jourard, 1958). The research on self-

disclosure in general is abundant, but for specific

topics and culturally considered taboos such as the

topic of sexual research it is still limited.

How many people are willing to disclose about a

sexual topic with a partner, and what impact such

disclosure has are an interesting topic to study.

Discussing sexual preferences is assumed to have a

positive impact on romantic relationships, but not

everyone can do it.

Talking about sexual topics is usually done in

private rooms (in bed), especially by romantic

couples who discuss sexual preferences or their likes

and dislikes regarding their sexual activities. Talking

openly about it with a partner is believed to increase

sexual satisfaction and reduce sexual problems

(Sandra Byers, 2011). On the other hand, teenagers

also enjoy talking about it in public spaces with their

peers. However, those sexual topics are often not

related to themself or direct self-disclosure, but

rather about disguised disclosure through humor

(Sanford and Eder, 1984). Interestingly,

technological developments allow communication

mediated by computers (the internet) across

boundaries of space and time. So face-to-face

communication is transformed into computer-

mediatedcommunication.

The main purpose of this study was to compare

sexual self-disclosure in offline and online contexts.

Further, more specifically, the aims of this study

were to review the theoretical foundations,

determine the pattern of sexual self-disclosure in

offline and online contexts, understand the

antecedent factors, analyze the role of sexual self-

Setyaningsih, R. and Putra, M.

From Bed to the Web: A Systematic Review Comparing Ofﬂine and Online Sexual Self-disclosure.

DOI: 10.5220/0008586101150119

In Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Psychology in Health, Educational, Social, and Organizational Settings (ICP-HESOS 2018) - Improving Mental Health and Har mony in

Global Community, pages 115-119

ISBN: 978-989-758-435-0

115

disclosure, and review the outcome of sexual self-

disclosure represented in the reviewed articles.

2 METHOD

We conducted a structured literature review

following the guidelines by Webster and Watson

(2002). Three databases (Google Scholar,

ResearchGate and Sage Publication) were used to

search for articles related to this topic, and were

performed in January 2018. A total of 986 titles

were found when we retrieved relevant studies

which were related to the keywords "sexual self-

disclosure", "sexual self-disclosure" + online, and

sexting. Next, titles and abstracts were reviewed. At

this point, we counted on the empirically tested

studies, which focused on sexual self-disclosure both

as a dependent and an antecedent variable, in offline

and online contexts. The search and review of

abstracts was done by the first author. Further

research that meets the criteria was reviewed in

conjunction with the second author. Surprisingly,

studies focusing on sexual self-disclosure have not

received much attention compared to general self-

disclosure or sexual topics in general. Initially the

researchers also paid attention to sexting, one form

of online sexual self-disclosure (Van Ouytsel et al.,

2017), but eventually research on that topic was

excluded because sexting does not always refer to

disclosing about self. Finally, 13 (8 offline and the

remaining online/digital) articles met the criteria and

were included in this study.

3 RESULTS

Analysis of the 7 offline and 4 online articles found

five major themes: theoretical foundations, patterns

of sexual self-disclosure, antecedent factors of

sexual self-disclosure, role of sexual self-disclosure,

and the outcome and consequence of sexual self

disclosure.

3.1 Theoretical Foundations

Based on our review we observed that past research

has approached sexual self-disclosure using a variety

of theoretical perspectives. The most prevalent

among these is the social exchange theory. This

theory states that people are motivated to engage in

social acts for gaining social reward and avoiding

social cost (Homans, 1961). Thus, disclosure about

sexual topics was motivated by the urgency of

maintaining or increasing the intimacy of a

relationsip.

3.2 Patterns of Sexual Self-disclosure

The pattern difference between offline and online

sexual self-disclosure is interesting to understand.

The patterns of sexual self-disclosure relied on the

relationship context. Our review was based on the

target of sexual self-disclosure and measurement

used in those studies.

Considering who was the target of sexual self-

disclosure, we found a significant difference in both

conditions. Sexual self-disclosure in offline contexts

usually happened in romantic, dating or marriage

relationships (Byers and Demmons, 1999; Greene

and Faulkner, 2005; MacNeil and Byers, 2005,

2009; Tanwar and Navya, 2017; Brown and Weigel,

2017). However, in the online context, the

relationship context was not specified, only declared

as “cyber friend” (Chiou, 2006; Chiou & Wan,

2006; Chiou, 2007) or huge audience (Bobkowski,

Brown and Neffa, 2012).

Talking about the measurement of sexual self-

disclosure, the initial scale of sexual self-disclosure

was developed by Herold and Way (1988) and Snell

Jr. et al. (1989). Herold and Way (1988) measured

sexual self-disclosure as the willingness to discuss

six topic areas: my personal views on sexual

morality, premarital sexual intercourse, oral sex,

masturbation, my sexual thoughts or fantasies, and

sexual problems or difficulties. Further, Snell Jr. et

al. (1989) defined sexual self-disclosure as the

willingness to discuss twelve sexual topics: (1)

sexual behaviors, (2) sexual sensations, (3) sexual

fantasies, (4) sexual attitudes, (5) the meaning of

sex, (6) negative sexual affect, (7) positive sexual

affect, (8) distressing sexual experiences, (10) sexual

responsibility, (11) sexual dishonesty, and (12) rape.

Both of them were not strictly different, and they

emphazised the willingness to talk about sexual

topics.

There were interesting findings in the differences

in offline and online sexual self-disclosure patterns

based on their measurements. In the offline context,

three patterns were recorded in this review. Sexual

self-disclosure was defines by willingness to discuss

sexual topics (Herold and Way, 1988a; Snell, Jr. et

al., 1989; Greene and Faulkner, 2005; Tanwar and

Navya, 2017); the extent of disclosure about likes

and dislikes with respect to sexual activity to a

dating partner (Byers and Demmons, 1999; MacNeil

and Byers, 2005, 2009), and report of the actual

ICP-HESOS 2018 - International Conference on Psychology in Health, Educational, Social, and Organizational Settings

116

level of talking about avoided sexual topics with a

partner (Brown and Weigel, 2017).

In the online context, two patterns of sexual self-

disclosure were recorded. Fisrt, sexual self-

disclosure was defined as the willingness to talk

about sexual topics (15 sexual topics that varied on

level of intimacy) (Yang, Yang and Chiou, 2010;

Chiou, 2006, 2007; Chiou and Wan, 2006). This

pattern did not differ from the offline context;

however, the target of sexual self-disclosure was

strictly different. Second, online sexual self-

disclosure was defined as uploading pictures or texts

that reference revealing personal sexual behavior

(Bobkowski, Brown and Neffa, 2012). According to

the last pattern in the online context, we believe that

although online sexual self-disclosure has not been

widely studied, the phenomenon is widely

encountered on social networking sites.

3.3 Antecedent Factors of Sexual Self-

disclosure

Talking about what factors influence someone’s

willingness to discuss sexual topics is interesting.

The review revealed several factors had a significant

influence, and those were different in offline and

online contexts.

First, gender had a significant influence. In

general self-disclosure, previous research shows

that, compared to males, females were more willing

to give personal information to others (Dindia and

Allen, 1992). However, in sexual self-disclosure,

males were more open about sexual topics in both

context situations (Greene and Faulkner, 2005;

Chiou and Wan, 2006; Chiou, 2007).

Second, in offline contexts, a contextual model

proposed to explain the factors that contribute to a

person’s willingness or unwillingness to disclose

about sexual topics (Brown and Weigel, 2017).

Based on a contextual model, people will engage in

sexual self-disclosure if the relationship context

factors (responsiveness, uncertainty, general

communication quality and relationship satisfaction)

and the sexual disclosure context (risks,

consequences and depth of disclosure) provide

greater support for self-disclosure (Brown and

Weigel, 2017). When someone felt that the

environment was safe for expressing sexual self-

disclosure, he/she would share their intimate sexual

desires and beliefs with his/her partner, even for

taboo topics.

Third, in the online context, cyberspace’s

anonymity, de-individuation and impression

management predicted the higher willingness to

discuss sexual topics in cyberspace (Chiou, 2006).

But that research found that those factors might not

be the main factors in an individual’s level of sexual

self-disclosure, because compared with real life,

adolescents had the same level in revealing sexual

topics in cyberspace (Chiou and Wan, 2006).

The last antecedent factors were based on

problem behavior theory (Jessor & Jessor, 1997 in

Bobkowski et al., 2012). Online sexual self-

disclosure is believed to fit with the category of a

sexual risk behavior, positively corelated with sexual

risk behavior offline and negatively correlated with

protective behaviors. Higher sexual experience,

sexual debut and casual sex in offline contexts

predicted higher sexual self-disclosure in online

contexts (Bobkowski et al., 2012).

3.4 Role of Sexual Self-disclosure

Sexual self-disclosure was believed to be one

indicator of sexual well-being, and the dynamic role

of sexual self-disclosure is clearly explained in two

studies (MacNeil and Byers, 2005, 2009). Two roles

of sexual self-disclosure in romantic relationships

are instrumental and expresssive. Both are only

discussed in the offline context.

Sexual self-disclosure had an instrumental role,

disclosure of sexual likes and dislikes was a way of

informing and getting more of what was desired or

reducing what was sexually unwanted from one's

partner. The final goal was reaching greater partner

understanding of sexual rewards and reducing sexual

costs.

Sexual self-disclosure had an expressive role

when the goal of disclosure was to express sexual

likes and dislikes and gain a more positive response

from the partner. On this point, the reciprocal

dynamic of sexual self-disclosure contributes to

relationship satisfaction.

3.5 Outcome of Sexual Self-disclosure

The question about the importance of sexual self-

disclosure in a romantic relationship is talking about

the outcome of sexual self-disclosure in offline

contexts, especially in romantic relationships. Sexual

satisfaction is the main outcome of sexual self-

disclosure between partners. Sexual satisfaction was

believed to be the outcome of sexual self-disclosure

with their partner. Sexual self-disclosure affects

sexual satisfaction through increasing sexual

rewards and overall relationship satisfaction (Byers

and Demmons, 1999; MacNeil and Byers, 2009,

2005; Brown and Weigel, 2017).

From Bed to the Web: A Systematic Review Comparing Ofﬂine and Online Sexual Self-disclosure

117

In online contexts, the negative outcome might

be considered. “Sexual self-disclosure is of concern

because of the potential detrimental implications for

the minority of young people who produce them,

and for their peers who consume them” (Bobkowski,

Brown and Neffa, 2012). As online sexual self-

disclosure is classified as a risk behavior, we must

try to eliminate the negative outcome of this

behavior.

4 DISCUSSION AND

CONCLUSION

This review found that sexual self-disclosure is an

important aspect in a romantic relationship, and

leads to sexual and relationship satisfaction. The

instrumental and expressive pathways are the best

explanation for the association between sexual self-

disclosure and sexual satisfaction.

The pattern of sexual self-disclosure in offline

and online contexts is discussing sexual topics with

a specific target. However, in the specific pattern

found in social networking sites, the sexual self-

disclosure is revealing sexual activities through

pictures and text.

Male participants showed a greater willingness to

communicate sexual disclosure in both offline and

online contexts. Males were more likely to

communicate sexual disclosures because there was

less impact of cultural double standards for a man

than for woman (Greene and Faulkner, 2005)

There were two limitations to this study. First,

the sample of the reviewed articles was not

homogenous. In offline contexts the majority of the

sample were university students and adults, but in

the online context the sample were adolescents. That

difference might have potential significance due to

developmental tasks and the real relationship

context. Second is the variable of sexual self-

disclosure itself. The variable sometimes becomes

antecedent and sometimes becomes a dependent

variable. On this point, it must be difficult to

establish the real differences between them. Further

study must clearly find the differences based on the

typical sample characteristics and the same

relationship context both offline and online.

REFERENCES

Altman, I. and Taylor, D.A., 1973. Social penetration: The

development of interpersonal relationships. New

York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.

Bobkowski, P.S., Brown, J.D. and Neffa, D.R., 2012. “Hit

me up and we can get down” US youths’ risk

behaviors and sexual self-disclosure in MySpace

profiles. Journal of Children and Media, 6(1), pp.119–

134.

Brown, R.D. and Weigel, D.J., 2017. Exploring a

Contextual Model of Sexual Self-Disclosure and

Sexual Satisfaction. Journal of Sex Research, 00(00),

pp.1–12.

Byers, E.S. and Demmons, S., 1999. Sexual satisfaction

and sexual self-disclosure within dating relationships.

The Journal of Sex Research, 36(2), pp.180–189.

Chiou, W.-B., 2007. Adolescents’ Reply Intent for Sexual

Disclosure in Cyberspace: Gender Differences and

Effects of Anonymity and Topic Intimacy.

CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10(5), pp.725–728.

Chiou, W. Bin, 2006. Adolescents’ sexual self-disclosure

on the internet: Deindividuation and impression

management. Adolescence, 41(163), pp.547–561.

Chiou, W. and Wan, C., 2006. Sexual self-disclosure in

Cyberspace among Taiwanese adolescents: gender

differences and the interplay of Cyberspace and real

life. Cyberpsychology & behavior : the impact of the

Internet, multimedia and virtual reality on behavior

and society, 9(1), pp.46–53.

Collins, N.L. and Miller, L.C., 1994. Self - Disclosure and

Liking : A Meta - Analytic Review. Psychological

Bulletin, 116(3), pp.457–475.

Dindia, K. and Allen, M., 1992. Sex Differences in Self-

Disclosure : A Meta- Analysis Sex Differences in Self-

Disclosure : A Meta-Analysis. 112(August 1992),

pp.106–124.

Greene, K. and Faulkner, S.L., 2005. Gender, belief in the

sexual double standard, and sexual talk in heterosexual

dating relationships. Sex Roles, 53(3–4), pp.239–251.

Herold, E.S. and Way, L., 1988a. Sexual self-disclosure

among university women. Journal of Sex Research,

24(1), pp.1–14.

Herold, E.S. and Way, L., 1988b. Sexual Self-Disclosure

Among University Women. The Journal of Sex

Research, 24(1), pp.1–14.

Jourard, S.M., 1958. A Study of Self- Disclosure.

Scientific American, 198(5), pp.77–82.

MacNeil, S. and Byers, E.S., 2005. Dyadic assessment of

sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction in

heterosexual dating couples. Journal of Social and

Personal Relationships, 22(2), pp.169–181.

MacNeil, S. and Byers, E.S., 2009. Role of sexual self-

disclosure in the sexual satisfaction of long-term

heterosexual couples. Journal of Sex Research, 46(1),

pp.3–14.

Van Ouytsel, J., Ponnet, K., Walrave, M. and D’Haenens,

L., 2017. Adolescent sexting from a social learning

perspective. Telematics and Informatics

, 34(1),

pp.287–298.

Sandra Byers, E., 2011. Beyond the birds and the bees and

was it good for you?: Thirty years of research on

sexual communication. Canadian Psychology, 52(1),

pp.20–28.

ICP-HESOS 2018 - International Conference on Psychology in Health, Educational, Social, and Organizational Settings

118

Sanford, S. and Eder, D., 1984. Adolescent Humor During

Peer Interaction. Social Psychology Quarterly, 47(3),

pp.235–243.

Snell, Jr., W.E., Belk, S.S., Papini, D.R. and Clark, S.,

1989. Development and Validation of the Sexual Self-

Disclosure Scale. Annals of Sex Research, 2, pp.307–

334.

Tanwar, K. and Navya, N., 2017. study of sexual self-

disclosure and quality of life in single and dual earning

couples. International Research Journal of Human

Resources and Social Sciences, 4(6), pp.240–255.

Webster, J. and Watson, R.T., 2002. Analyzing the Past to

Prepare for the Future: Writing a Literature Review.

MIS Quarterly, 26(2), pp.xiii–xxiii.

Yang, M.L., Yang, C.C. and Chiou, W. Bin, 2010.

Differences in engaging in sexual disclosure between

real life and cyberspace among adolescents: Social

penetration model revisited. Current Psychology,

29(2), pp.144–154.

From Bed to the Web: A Systematic Review Comparing Ofﬂine and Online Sexual Self-disclosure

119