Journal of Social and Personal Relationships-2005-MacNeil-169-81

http://spr.sagepub.
com/
Relationships
Journal of Social and Personal
http://spr.sagepub.com/content/22/2/169
The online version of this article can be found at:
DOI: 10.1177/0265407505050942
2005 22: 169 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships
Sheila MacNeil and E. Sandra Byers
heterosexual dating couples
Dyadic assessment of sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction in
Published by:
http://www.sagepublications.com
On behalf of:
International Association for Relationship Research

can be found at: Journal of Social and Personal Relationships Additional services and information for
http://spr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:
http://spr.sagepub.com/subscriptions Subscriptions:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsReprints.nav Reprints:
http://www.sagepub.com/journalsPermissions.nav Permissions:
http://spr.sagepub.com/content/22/2/169.refs.html Citations:
What is This?
- Apr 12, 2005 Version of Record >>

at West Uni from Timisoara on June 21, 2014 spr.sagepub.com Downloaded from at West Uni from Timisoara on June 21, 2014 spr.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Dyadic assessment of sexual
self-disclosure and sexual
satisfaction in heterosexual
dating couples
Sheila MacNeil
Dalhousie University
E. Sandra Byers
University of New Brunswick
ABSTRACT
We examined two proposed pathways between sexual self-
disclosure and sexual satisfaction. According to the proposed
expressive pathway, reciprocal sexual self-disclosure
contributes to relationship satisfaction, which in turn leads to
greater sexual satisfaction. According to the instrumental
pathway, own sexual self-disclosure leads to greater partner
understanding of sexual likes and dislikes, which in turn leads
to a more favorable balance of sexual rewards and costs and
thus to higher sexual satisfaction. Seventy-four heterosexual
dating couples completed questionnaires assessing self-
disclosure, sexual and relationship satisfaction, as well as
own and partner positive and negative sexual exchanges.
Support was found for the instrumental pathway for both
women and men and for the expressive pathway for women.
For men, the expressive pathway was between own nonsex-
ual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction. These results are
interpreted in light of the more instrumental role for men in
sexual relationships.
KEY WORDS: intimate relationships self-disclosure sexual
communication sexual satisfaction
Journal of Social and Personal Relationships Copyright 2005 SAGE Publications
(www.sagepublications.com), Vol. 22(2): 169181. DOI: 10.1177/0265407505050942
This study was conducted by the rst author in partial fulllment of the doctoral degree
requirements under the supervision of the second author. The authors would like to thank
Barry Spinner for his statistical advice and the members of the sexuality research group at the
University of New Brunswick, Shannon Archibald, Jacqueline Cohen, Suzanne Lemieux, and
Angela Weaver, who provided invaluable feedback during the development of this study. All
correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to E. Sandra Byers, Department
of Psychology, University of New Brunswick, Fredericton, New Brunswick, Canada, E3B 6E4
[e-mail: byers@unb.ca]. Mark Fine was the Action Editor on this article.
02 macneil (ds) 23/3/05 8:33 am Page 169
at West Uni from Timisoara on June 21, 2014 spr.sagepub.com Downloaded from
Intimate communication is important to the development and maintenance
of satisfying sexual relationships. Cupach and Metts (1991) have suggested
that sexual communication impacts sexual satisfaction in two distinct ways,
although they did not name these pathways an expressive pathway and
an instrumental pathway. First, according to the proposed expressive
pathway, the extent of both partners actual self-disclosure about their
sexual likes and dislikes contributes to relationship intimacy and relation-
ship satisfaction. In turn, greater relationship satisfaction leads to greater
sexual satisfaction. Second, according to the instrumental pathway, own
sexual self-disclosure leads to greater partner understanding of sexual likes
and dislikes which leads to a sexual script that maximizes positive sexual
interactions (rewards) and minimizes negative sexual interactions (costs)
for self. A more favorable balance of rewards and costs, in turn, leads to a
mutually agreed upon and enjoyable sexual script and thus to higher sexual
satisfaction for the individual. The goal of the present study was to test
whether there is empirical support for each of these pathways.
The expressive pathway
There is some empirical support for the expressive pathway. Past research
has found that greater self-disclosure is associated with higher relationship
satisfaction and that higher relationship satisfaction is associated with
higher sexual satisfaction (Banmen & Vogel, 1985; Cupach & Comstock,
1990; Lawrance & Byers, 1995; Meeks, Hendrick, & Hendrick, 1998).
Moreover, Byers and Demmons (1999) found that relationship satisfaction
partially mediates the relationship between sexual self-disclosure and
sexual satisfaction among daters. These results support the notion that
sexual self-disclosure contributes to greater sexual satisfaction, at least in
part, because it contributes to a more positive evaluation of the relation-
ship overall. However, as none of these researchers surveyed both couple
members, the importance of mutual self-disclosure (i.e., self-disclosure by
both members of the couple) is not known.
In keeping with the expressive pathway and procedures for establishing
mediation (Baron & Kenny, 1986), we made the following predictions: (i)
greater mutual sexual self-disclosure would be associated with greater
sexual satisfaction and greater relationship satisfaction; (ii) greater
relationship satisfaction would be associated with greater sexual satis-
faction; and, (iii) relationship satisfaction would mediate the relationship
between mutual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction.
The instrumental pathway
There is also some preliminary support for the instrumental pathway.
MacNeil and Byers (1997) found that, for individuals in long-term relation-
ships, greater disclosure of specic sexual likes and dislikes was related to
greater sexual satisfaction over and above the contribution of nonsexual
self-disclosure. This suggests that sexual self-disclosure serves an instru-
mental function that is independent of other forms of communication taking
place within the relationship. Similarly, Byers and Demmons (1999) found
170 Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 22(2)
that participants who reported experiencing more sexual rewards with their
dating partner reported greater sexual self-disclosure and greater sexual
satisfaction. Furthermore, the level of sexual rewards partially mediated the
relationship between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction. These
ndings suggest that people who tell their partner about their sexual likes
and dislikes are more sexually satised, at least in part, because their partner
understands their sexual preferences, and thus engages in more sexual
activities that are pleasing to the individual. However, Byers and Demmons
did not assess partner understanding directly.
Laing, Phillipson, and Lee (1966) proposed that understanding, or the
extent to which each person recognizes the others point of view, is an
important aspect of communication. Studies by Purnine and Carey (1997)
and Ross, Clifford, and Eisenman (1987) found that greater partner under-
standing of sexual preferences contributes to womens relationship satis-
faction and mens sexual satisfaction. Although these researchers
interpreted their results as indicating that greater understanding was a
result of effective sexual communication between partners, neither of these
studies assessed communication directly. Thus, it could also be, for
example, that understanding is a function of the similarity of the ideal
sexual scripts that partners bring to the relationship rather than of the
effectiveness of communication.
Consistent with the instrumental pathway, Byers and colleagues found
that a favorable ratio of positive to negative sexual exchanges between
partners in the sexual relationship is associated with greater sexual satis-
faction (Byers, Demmons, & Lawrance, 1998; Lawrance & Byers, 1995).
They also found that sexual rewards partially mediate the relationship
between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction among dating indi-
viduals (Byers & Demmons, 1999). However, the researchers surveyed
only one member of the couple and thus were not able to assess partner
understanding, or the relationship between partner understanding and
sexual exchanges. In sum, several aspects of the instrumental pathway have
not been tested directly to date.
Based on the proposed instrumental pathway and criteria to establish
mediation (Baron & Kenny, 1986), we made the following predictions (see
Figure 2):
1 Greater sexual self-disclosure would be associated with greater partner
understanding of rewards and costs, a more favorable balance of sexual
exchanges (rewards and costs), and greater sexual satisfaction.
2 Greater understanding of rewards and costs would be associated with a
more favorable balance of sexual exchanges, and greater sexual satis-
faction.
3 A more favorable balance of sexual exchanges would be associated with
greater sexual satisfaction.
4 Partner understanding and the balance of sexual exchanges would
mediate the relationship between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satis-
faction.
MacNeil & Byers: Sexual self-disclosure and satisfaction 171
Method
Participants
Participants were 74 students and their partners who were in heterosexual
dating relationships of between 3 months and 3 years duration. One additional
dyad was dropped because they were identied as a multivariate outlier in
several of the analyses (Tabachnick & Fidell, 1996). The 74 student participants
did not differ from 24 other student volunteers whose partners did not return
questionnaires in terms of demographic characteristics, although they were
slightly more relationally satised (M = 31.3 and 29.3, respectively). On
average, participants had been dating for 12.4 months (SD = 9.9), were dating
each other exclusively (89%), and had engaged in both intercourse (89%) and
oral sex (93%) with each other. Participants ranged in age from 17 to 33 years
(M = 20.5 years for the male partner and 19.3 for the female partner).
Measures
The measures used to test the expressive and instrumental pathways are
described below. The Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire, Primary
Communications Inventory, Global Measure of Relationship Satisfaction, and
Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction were used to test the expressive
pathway. The Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire, Primary Communication
Inventory, Sexual Rewards and Costs Checklist, Sexual Exchanges Question-
naire, and Global Measure of Sexual Satisfaction were used to test the instru-
mental pathway. A background questionnaire was used to collect demographic
information.
The Sexual Self-Disclosure Questionnaire (Byers & Demmons, 1999) was
used to assess the extent of sexual self-disclosure (SSD) between partners. Six
of 12 items assess how much participants have told their partners about what
they like about a range of sexual activities they have engaged in as a couple
(e.g., kissing, touching, intercourse); the other six items assess how much they
have told their partner about what they do not like about these sexual activi-
ties. Participants rst completed the questionnaire with respect to their own
self-disclosure by indicating the extent of their disclosure on a 7-point scale.
Mean scores for SSD were computed such that respondents were given a score
based only on the sexual activities in which they had engaged: eight couples
had engaged in oral sex but not intercourse; ve couples had engaged in inter-
course but not oral sex.
The Primary Communication Inventory (PCI; Navran, 1967) is a 26-item
scale with demonstrated validity that was used to measure the frequency of
respondents verbal and nonverbal self-disclosing communication with their
partner about nonsexual topics. Items were summed to yield a nonsexual self-
disclosure (NSD) score, excluding the one sex-related item, with a possible
range of scores from 25 to 125.
The following four measures from the Interpersonal Exchange Model of
Sexual Satisfaction Questionnaire were used (Lawrance & Byers, 1998). The
Global Measure of Relationship Satisfaction (GMREL) assesses satisfaction
with the overall relationship. In response to the question: In general, how
would you describe your overall relationship with your partner? respondents
rate their overall relationship on ve 7-point bipolar scales. The Global
Measure of Sexual Satisfaction (GMSEX) assesses satisfaction with the sexual
relationship in response to the question: In general, how would you describe
your sexual relationship with your partner? Possible scores on both measures
range from 5 to 35, with lower scores indicating less relationship/sexual satis-
faction. Lawrance and Byers (1998) provide evidence for the reliability and
validity of the GMREL and GMSEX. Internal consistency in the present
sample was high (Chronbachs = .84 for the men and .91 for the women for
the GMREL; Chronbachs = .94 for the men and .93 for the women for the
GMSEX).
The 46-item Sexual Rewards and Costs Checklist was used to assess partner
understanding of sexual rewards and costs. Each item represents a sexual
exchange (e.g., level of affection expressed during sexual activity, oral sex) that
respondents could rate as a reward, a cost, both a reward and a cost, or neither
a reward nor a cost in their sexual relationship. Partners completed the check-
list both from their own perspective, and in terms of their perception of
whether each item represented a reward and/or a cost for their partner. This
required the slight rewording of some items to t the partner perspective. To
calculate mens understanding of rewards (UND
REW
), mens ratings of rewards
for their partner were compared to womens ratings of rewards for self. The
number of matching responses was divided by the total number of responses
made by both partners. The same procedure was used to calculate UND
REW
for women, and understanding of costs (UND
CST
) for men and for women.
Participants completed the 6-item Sexual Exchanges Questionnaire although
only the items assessing the level of rewards and the level of costs were used
in the present study. Participants indicated how rewarding (REW) and costly
(CST) they considered their sexual relationship with their partner to be on
separate 9-point scales. The difference between these two ratings
(REW CST) was used as a measure of the balance of sexual exchanges in the
relationship. Possible REW CST scores ranged from +8 to 8 with higher
scores indicating a more favorable balance of sexual exchanges. REW CST
has been found to predict sexual satisfaction among individuals in dating and
long-term relationships (Byers & Demmons, 1999; Lawrance & Byers, 1995).
Procedure
Participants who were in a dating relationship of between 3 months and 3 years
were recruited from an introductory psychology course for a study of communi-
cation and sexual satisfaction among dating couples that had been approved by
the university Research Ethics Board. After informed consent was obtained,
participants completed the questionnaire package in small groups in the follow-
ing order: the background questionnaire, Sexual Rewards and Costs Checklist,
Sexual Exchanges Questionnaire, GMREL, GMSEX, Sexual Self-Disclosure
Questionnaire, and the PCI. Finally, participants completed a number of
measures based on their perceptions of their partner including the Sexual
Rewards and Costs Checklist.
After the completed questionnaires were collected, participants were given
an identical numbered questionnaire package, an informed consent form, a
stamped return envelope, and a rafe ticket to take to their dating partner. The
importance of having the partner complete the questionnaires independently
was stressed to participants as well as to the partner in the cover letter. Partici-
pants received course credit for their participation regardless of whether their
partner participated. Partners were entered in a draw for a dinner for two at a
local restaurant.
Results
On average, participants reported a favorable balance of sexual rewards and
costs and high sexual satisfaction and relationship satisfaction. In addition,
participants reported disclosing a moderate amount about their sexual likes
and dislikes and the nonsexual areas in their relationship. The men and women
did not differ in their balance of rewards to costs, sexual satisfaction, relation-
ship satisfaction, or sexual self-disclosure. However, the women were found to
disclose signicantly more than the men about nonsexual topics (M= 93.92 and
90.02, respectively), F(1,73) = 10.82, p < .01, = .13.
Testing the expressive pathway
Analysis of the expressive pathway was conducted separately for male and
female participants. Zero-order correlations and multiple regression analyses
were used to establish the conditions for testing mediation.
Women. The signicant paths for women are depicted in Figure 1. First, we
regressed relationship satisfaction on the mutual self-disclosure set (men and
womens nonsexual self-disclosure and sexual self-disclosure). The self-
disclosure set was signicantly related to womens relationship satisfaction
(GMREL), R
2
= .19, F(4,69) = 3.91, p < .01. Although both mens and womens
nonsexual self-disclosure and womens sexual self-disclosure were related to
womens relationship satisfaction on a bivariate basis (r = .20, .34, and .33,
respectively), only womens sexual self-disclosure and nonsexual self-disclosure
were uniquely associated with their relationship satisfaction. Second, the
regression of womens sexual satisfaction (GMSEX) on the self-disclosure set
was signicant, R
2
= .28, F(4,69) = 6.80, p < .001. Both mens and womens
nonsexual self-disclosure and womens sexual self-disclosure were associated
with GMSEX on the bivariate level (r = .21, .26, .49, respectively). However,
only womens sexual self-disclosure was uniquely associated with their sexual
satisfaction. Finally, as predicted, for women greater relationship satisfaction
was associated with greater sexual satisfaction.
These analyses satisfy the conditions needed to test whether relationship
satisfaction mediates the association between womens sexual self-disclosure
and their sexual satisfaction (Baron & Kenny, 1986). After controlling for
GMREL, the contribution of womens sexual self-disclosure to the prediction
of their sexual satisfaction, although still signicant, was markedly reduced
from = .50 to .32. This indicates that, as predicted, relationship satisfaction is
a partial mediator of the relationship between self-disclosure and sexual satis-
faction for women.
Men. The same steps were used to test the expressive pathway for men; the
signicant paths are depicted in Figure 2. First, the self-disclosure set was
signicantly associated with mens relationship satisfaction, R
2
= .23,
F(4,69) = 5.02, p = .001. Mens nonsexual self-disclosure and mens sexual self-
disclosure were related to their relationship satisfaction on a bivariate basis
(r = .42 and .29, respectively). However, only mens nonsexual self-disclosure
was uniquely related to their relationship satisfaction. Second, the self-
disclosure set was signicantly associated with mens sexual satisfaction,
R
2
= .23, F(4,69) = 5.23, p = .001. Again, although the zero-order correlations
between mens GMSEX and their nonsexual self-disclosure and sexual
self-disclosure were signicant (r = .43 and .20, respectively), only mens
nonsexual self-disclosure was uniquely related to their sexual satisfaction.
Finally, as predicted, for men greater relationship satisfaction was associated
with greater sexual satisfaction.
FIGURE 1
The expressive pathway for women linking self-disclosure and sexual
satisfaction.
Note. Values on the paths are path coefcients (standardized betas). Path coefcients outside
parentheses are zero-order betas. Path coefcients in parentheses are partial regression
coefcients from equations that include the preceding variables. SSD = Sexual Self-
Disclosure; NSD = Nonsexual Self-Disclosure; GMREL = relationship satisfaction; GMSEX
= sexual satisfaction.
*p < .05; **p < .01; ***p < .001; ns, not signicant.
50*** (.32***)
.27* Womens .75*** (.67***) Womens
Womens SSD GMREL GMSEX
Womens NSD
.25* .06
ns

Mens SSD
.18
ns
.19
ns
Mens NSD .12
ns
.18
ns

FIGURE 2
The expressive pathway for men linking self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction.
Disclosure; NSD = Nonsexual Self-Disclosure; GMREL = relationship satisfaction; GMSEX
= sexual satisfaction.
Mens
Mens
Mens NSD
GMREL
GMSEX
Mens SSD
.18
ns
.05
ns
Womens NSD
.10
ns
.19
ns
Womens SSD .16
ns
.12
ns

.42*** .67***(.59***)
.52*** (.27**)
These analyses indicate that all the conditions were met to test whether
relationship satisfaction mediates the relationship between mens nonsexual
self-disclosure and their sexual satisfaction (Baron & Kenny, 1986). After
controlling for GMREL, the unique contribution of mens nonsexual self-
disclosure to GMSEX, although still signicant, was reduced from = .52 to
.27, p < .01 (see Figure 2). This indicates that, for men, relationship satisfaction
is a partial mediator of the relationship between their nonsexual self-disclosure
and their sexual satisfaction.
Testing the instrumental pathway
Women. The signicant pathways for women are depicted in Figure 3. Examin-
ation of the zero-order correlations indicated that, as predicted, womens
sexual self-disclosure was signicantly associated with their balance of rewards
and costs (REW CST) and sexual satisfaction as well as with their partners
understanding of their sexual rewards (UND
REW
) but not with their partners
understanding of their sexual costs (UND
CST
). The association between
REW CST and sexual satisfaction was also signicant. Multiple regression
analyses indicated that both the male partners UND
REW
and UND
CST
were
uniquely associated with the womens REW CST, R
2
= .26, F(2,71) = 12.53,
p < .001. However, only the male partners UND
REW
, and not their UND
CST
,
was associated with womens sexual satisfaction, R
2
= .12, F(2,71) = 4.63,
p < .05.
These analyses demonstrate that the conditions were met to test whether
partner understanding of rewards and the balance of sexual exchanges mediate
the relationship between womens SSD and their sexual satisfaction. To do this,
we conducted two hierarchical multiple regression analyses. First, after control-
ling for the male partners UND
REW
the association between womens sexual
self-disclosure and REW CST was reduced from = .40 to .26. Second, after
controlling for mens UND
REW,
the association between womens sexual self-
disclosure and their sexual satisfaction was reduced from = .49 to .43; when
REW CST was also controlled, and was further reduced to .29. Thus, for the
women, the male partners UND
REW
partially mediated the relationship
between their own sexual self-disclosure and REW CST; both the male
partners UND
REW
and womens REW CST partially mediated the associ-
ation between their own sexual self-disclosure and their sexual satisfaction.
Men. The same steps were used to test the instrumental pathway for the men;
the signicant paths are depicted in Figure 4. Examination of the zero-order
correlations indicated that, as predicted, mens SSD was signicantly associated
with their REW CST and sexual satisfaction, as well as with their female
partners UND
REW
but not their UND
CST
. The association between the mens
REW CST and sexual satisfaction was also signicant. Multiple regression
analysis indicated that the female partners UND
REW
but not their UND
CST
,
was signicantly associated with the mens REW CST, R
2
= .27,
F(2,71) = 13.34, p < .001. Similarly, only the female partners UND
REW
, and not
their UND
CST
, was associated with for mens sexual satisfaction, R
2
= .25,
F(2,71) = 11.66, p < .001.
Taken together, these analyses demonstrate that the conditions were met to
test whether partner understanding of rewards and the balance of sexual
exchanges mediate the relationship between mens SSD and their sexual
satisfaction. Again we conducted two hierarchical multiple regression analyses.
First, after controlling for womens UND
REW
, the association between mens
sexual self-disclosure and their REW CST was reduced from = .31 to .15,
p > .05. Second, after controlling for womens UND
REW
, the association
between mens sexual self-disclosure and their sexual satisfaction was reduced
from = .20 to .03, p > .05. Thus, womens UND
REW
fully mediated the
FIGURE 3
The instrumental pathway for women linking sexual self-disclosure and sexual
satisfaction.
Disclosure; UND
REW
= Partner Understanding of Rewards; UND
CST
= Partner
Understanding of Costs; REW CST = balance of sexual exchanges; GMSEX = sexual
satisfaction.
49*** (.29**)
Womens .31** .48*** (.40***) Womens .63***(.52***) Womens
SSD
UND
REW
REW CST GMSEX
.12
ns

UND
CST
*** (.26**)
.20*(.17*)
.33***
.11
ns
FIGURE 4
The instrumental pathway for men linking sexual self-disclosure and sexual
satisfaction.
coefcients from equations that include the preceding variables. SSD = Sexual Self-Disclosure;
UND
REW
= Partner Understanding of Rewards; UND
CST
= Partner Understanding of Costs;
REW CST = balance of sexual exchanges; GMSEX = sexual satisfaction.
.20* (.03
ns
)
.50***
Mens
.35*** .52*** (.47***) Mens .76*** (.71***) Mens
SSD
UND
REW
REW CST GMSEX
.13
ns
.01
ns
(.02
ns
) .04
ns
UND
CST
.31** (.14
ns
)
relationship between mens sexual self-disclosure and both their REW CST
and their sexual satisfaction.
Follow-up analyses
We conducted two 2 (Sex) 2 (UND
rew
, UND
cst
) follow-up ANOVAs to help
explain the ndings that, for the most part, partner understanding of costs
failed to correlate with other elements of the proposed instrumental pathway
as predicted. First, we analyzed disclosure of sexual likes and dislikes. We
found that participants disclosed more about their sexual likes (M= 5.17) than
about their sexual dislikes (M = 4.45), F(1,72) = 41.38, p < .001, = .38.
Although the men and women did not differ in how much they disclosed about
their sexual likes (M = 5.2 and 5.1, respectively), the women disclosed signi-
cantly more than the men did about their sexual dislikes (M = 4.8 and 4.2,
respectively), F(1,72) = 17.60, p < .001, = .23. Second, we analyzed under-
standing of sexual rewards and costs; understanding of sexual rewards was
signicantly greater than understanding of sexual costs, F(1,73) = 500.69,
p < .001, = .88. On average, participants understood 67% of their partners
sexual rewards, but only 22% of their partners sexual costs.
Discussion
This study investigated two proposed pathways between sexual self-
disclosure and sexual satisfaction an expressive pathway and an instru-
mental pathway. The results of this study provide support for the expressive
pathway for women and for the instrumental pathway for both men and
women.
The expressive pathway
In terms of the expressive pathway, as predicted, relationship satisfaction was
a partial mediator of the association between self-disclosure and sexual satis-
faction for women. These results suggest that, for women, greater sexual and
nonsexual self-disclosure led to greater emotional intimacy, which in turn
leads to higher sexual satisfaction. In contrast, we did not nd evidence for
an expressive pathway between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction
for men. Although own sexual self-disclosure was related to sexual satis-
faction for men, it did not enhance their relationship satisfaction or sexual
satisfaction over and above the contribution of being in a generally self-
disclosing and intimate relationship. That is, relationship satisfaction
mediated the association between nonsexual self-disclosure and sexual satis-
faction rather than between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction as
hypothesized. This suggests that, for men, sexual self-disclosure may not
enhance the feelings of intimacy that arise from their self-disclosure gener-
ally. This may be because men tend to be more instrumental in sexual
relationships (Lawrance, Taylor, & Byers, 1996) and may not need to self-
disclose their sexual preferences to feel close to their partner or to be sexually
satised. Alternatively, it may be that men only self-disclose their sexual
preferences in the context of an overall disclosing relationship.
We also did not nd support for the role of mutual self-disclosure in
enhancing sexual satisfaction in that only own self-disclosure and not
partner self-disclosure was associated with sexual satisfaction. Given that
self-disclosure between partners is thought to increase in depth and
decrease in breadth as intimacy increases (Altman & Taylor, 1973), it is
possible that sexual self-disclosure by both partners may contribute more
to relationship and sexual satisfaction in long-term relationships than in
dating relationships.
The instrumental pathway
What of the impact of sexual self-disclosure on the sexual script itself? As
predicted in the instrumental pathway, partner understanding of rewards
mediated the relationship between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satis-
faction, fully for men and partially for women. However, the mechanism
by which partner understanding impacts sexual satisfaction appears to be
somewhat different for men and women. For the women, it appears that
disclosing their sexual likes and dislikes to their partner contributed to their
own greater sexual satisfaction, because it improved partner understand-
ing, which in turn led to a more favorable balance of rewards and costs.
The balance of rewards and costs, in turn, resulted in greater sexual satis-
faction. The fact that partner understanding of sexual rewards and the
balance of sexual exchanges only partially mediated the relationship
between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction is consistent with the
ndings that there is also an expressive pathway between these two vari-
ables for women. Therefore, sexual self-disclosure may serve a number of
functions for women that contribute to their sexual satisfaction including
enhancing feelings of intimacy and increasing the likelihood that their
partner engages in sexual behaviors that are pleasurable to them. In
addition, disclosing sexual preferences may itself be a sexual reward,
regardless of whether these wishes are fullled (Lawrance & Byers, 1995).
For the men, partner understanding fully mediated the relationship
between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction suggesting that it
affects sexual satisfaction directly rather than indirectly through its impact
on sexual exchanges. That is, although sexual exchanges were strongly
associated with sexual satisfaction for men, this association does not appear
to result from mens sexual self-disclosure or their partners understanding.
Again, this may reect the fact that men are more instrumental in sexual
situations and thus direct a sexual script that maximizes rewards and mini-
mizes costs for them. Alternatively, it may reect differences in mens and
womens responsiveness to their partners self-disclosure, regardless of the
extent of their understanding. If men are less responsive than women,
womens self-disclosure would have less impact on the sexual script and
thus would be less strongly linked with sexual satisfaction.
Sexual rewards played a bigger role in the sexual satisfaction of these
dating couples than did sexual costs. This is consistent with the nding by
Byers and Demmons (1999) that sexual rewards, but not costs, partially
mediated the relationship between sexual self-disclosure and sexual
satisfaction in a sample of individuals in dating relationships. We found that
sexual self-disclosure was associated with partner understanding of sexual
rewards, but not with partner understanding of sexual costs. Similarly,
understanding of rewards but not understanding of costs was associated
with sexual satisfaction. This may reect the fact that both the men and
women disclosed signicantly more about their sexual likes than about
their sexual dislikes and understood signicantly more about their partners
sexual rewards than about their sexual costs. Thus, it is possible that indi-
viduals do not disclose enough about their sexual dislikes, at least at these
early relationship stages, to impact their partners understanding of what
they nd costly or displeasing about their sexual relationship. In fact, the
nding that partner understanding of costs was negatively related to
womens balance of rewards and costs suggests that the less favorable the
balance of a womans sexual exchanges, the more her partner is aware of
what she nds costly about the relationship. Thus, it is important to
examine the instrumental pathway among couples who are experiencing
more sexual costs in their sexual relationship than was characteristic of our
sample of young sexually and relationally satised dating couples.
Limitations and conclusions
The results help to clarify the mechanisms by which sexual self-disclosure
enhances sexual satisfaction, at least in highly satised dating couples.
However, they need to be interpreted in light of the limitations of the study.
First, we used self-report methods to investigate the two pathways. Because
we collected data from both members of each couple, we were able to
investigate actual self-disclosure by both partners and partner understand-
ing. However, other methodologies such as self-monitoring or diary studies,
qualitative methods, longitudinal, and/or direct observation in the labora-
tory may provide a better test of the hypotheses. Second, although tests of
mediation are an accepted way to infer causal relationships (Baron &
Kenny, 1986; Klem, 1995), longitudinal research would provide a stronger
test of the expressive and instrumental pathways. It may be that some of
the unexpected ndings (e.g., the fact that an expressive pathway was found
between sexual self-disclosure and sexual satisfaction for women but not
for men) are indications of other causal directions than those proposed
here. Third, although one partner completed the questionnaire in the
laboratory under controlled conditions and we took steps to ensure that the
nonstudent completed the questionnaire independently, we cannot be sure
that they did so. Nonetheless, the results of the present study shed light on
the mechanisms by which self-disclosure impacts sexual satisfaction.
REFERENCES
Altman, I., & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal
relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart, & Winston.
Banmen, J., & Vogel, N. A. (1985). The relationship between marital quality and interpersonal
sexual self-disclosure. Family Therapy, 12, 4558.
Baron, R. M., & Kenny, D. A. (1986). The moderatormediator variable distinction in social
psychology research: Conceptual, strategic, and statistical considerations. Journal of Person-
ality and Social Psychology, 51, 11731182.
Byers, E. S., & Demmons, S. (1999). Sexual satisfaction and sexual self-disclosure within
dating relationships. Journal of Sex Research, 36, 110.
Byers, E. S., Demmons, S., & Lawrance, K. (1998). Sexual satisfaction within dating relation-
ships: A test of the interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Journal of Social
and Personal Relationships, 15, 257267.
Cupach, W. R., & Comstock, J. (1990). Satisfaction with sexual communication in marriage:
Links to sexual satisfaction and dyadic adjustment. Journal of Social and Personal Relation-
ships, 7, 179186.
Cupach, W. R., & Metts, S. (1991). Sexuality and communication in close relationships. In K.
McKinney & S. Sprecher (Eds.), Sexuality in close relationships (pp. 93110). Hillsdale, NJ:
Erlbaum.
Klem, L. (1995). Path analysis. In L. G. Grimm & P. R. Yarnold (Eds.), Reading and under-
standing multivariate statistics (pp. 6597.) Washington, DC: American Psychological
Association.
Laing, R. D., Phillipson, H., & Lee, A. R. (1966). Interpersonal perception: A theory and a
method of research. New York: Springer.
Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1998). Interpersonal Exchange Model of Sexual Satisfaction
Questionnaire. In C. M. Davis, W. L. Yarber, R. Bauserman, G. Shreer, & S. L. Davis
(Eds.), Sexuality-related measures: A compendium (2nd ed., pp. 514519). Thousand Oaks,
CA: Sage.
Lawrance, K., & Byers, E. S. (1995). Sexual satisfaction in long-term heterosexual relation-
ships: The interpersonal exchange model of sexual satisfaction. Personal Relationships, 2,
267285.
Lawrance, K., Taylor, D., & Byers, E. S. (1996). Differences in mens and womens global,
sexual, and ideal-sexual expressiveness and instrumentality. Sex Roles, 34, 337357.
MacNeil, S., & Byers, E. S. (1997). The relationships between sexual problems, communi-
cation and sexual satisfaction. Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality, 6, 277283.
Meeks, B. S., Hendrick, S. S., & Hendrick, C. (1998). Self-disclosure, love, and relationship
satisfaction. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 15, 755773.
Navran, L. (1967). Communication and adjustment in marriage. Family Process, 6, 173184.
Purnine, D. M., & Carey, M. P. (1997). Interpersonal communication and sexual adjustment:
The roles of understanding and agreement. Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology,
65, 10171025.
Ross, J. L., Clifford, R. E., & Eisenman, R. (1987). Communication of sexual preferences in
married couples. Bulletin of the Psychonomic Society, 25, 5860.
Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (1996). Using multivariate statistics (3rd ed.). Northridge,
CA: Harper Collins.

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships-2005-MacNeil-169-81

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal of Social and Personal Relationships-2005-MacNeil-169-81

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

http://spr.sagepub.

International Association for Relationship Research

http://spr.sagepub.com/cgi/alerts Email Alerts:

- Apr 12, 2005 Version of Record >>

You might also like