Interpersonal Risk Theory

Lundstedt, Sven B.

doi:10.1080/00223980.1966.10543017

Cited by 13 publications

(11 citation statements)

References 5 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Considering the positive value attributed to therapist disclosure for the reduction of interpersonal distance (Jourard & Friedman, 1970) and risk (Doster & Strickland, 1971;Lundstedt, 1966), and as an exemplary model for productive behavior (Hays, 1971;McAllister & Kiesler 1972), further efforts should be made to identify the parameters of this intervention that facilitate or possibly inhibit the communication process. In this respect, interview research so far has given less attention to the characteristics of the model and more attention to the behavior modeled.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…A related area of research has narrowed its focus to the therapist as the behavioral model for the disclosure process in psychotherapy. Typically, these investigators embrace a theoretical model that attributes the client's avoidance of open communication to the risk of social censure and the potential loss of influence in the relationship (Doster & Strickland, 1971;Haley, 1963;Jourard, 1964;Lundstedt, 1966). By engaging in personal communication, the therapist establishes guidelines for the client's self-disclosure and demonstrates a willingness to relinquish control in this relationship.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Interviewer disclosure modeling, information revealed, and interviewee verbal behavior.

Doster¹,

Brooks²

1974

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The present study investigated the effectiveness of the interviewer as a model of and recipient for interviewee self-disclosure when modeled content revealed favorable or unfavorable personal information. Subjects in a control condition received only minimal interview structuring. During a 30-minute interview, subjects talked about their relationship with four target persons. Contrary to a "model status loss" hypothesis suggested by previous research, the disclosure of unfavorable information did not decrease the effectiveness of the interviewer's interventions. Although subjects' perceptions of their disclosing interviewer were in the expected direction on 9 of 10 interpersonal rating dimensions, betwecn-group differences did not reach significance. Subjects talked longer and achieved higher levels of self-exploration in both modeling conditions than in the no-model control situation. Frequency and patterning of subjects' positive and negative self-references also were related to treatment conditions. Implications for psychotherapy interventions and continued interview behavior research are discussed.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Interviewer disclosure modeling, information revealed, and interviewee verbal behavior.

Doster¹,

Brooks²

1974

Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Moreover, as Levinger & Breedlove (1966) recognized, there is a need t o establish a priori definitions of relevance that relate t o the potential rewards (such as personality support in the form of consensual validation) that value similarity may provide. T h e present paper attempts to meet these difficulties by proposing two definitions of relevance (namely, value importance a n d similarity uncommonness) and then offering an explanation of their role in relationship development o n the basis of a predictive filter theory of friendship development (Duck, 1973(Duck, , 1977, social exchange theory (Thibaut & Kelley, 1959) and the notion of interpersonal risk (Lundstedt, 1966).…”

Section: A Model For the Role Of Similarity Of Values In Friendship Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Nelson-Jones & Strong (1976) found that the level of friendship existing between subjects and the recipient of a disclosure lessened subjects' perceived risk of rejection or loss of self-esteem which the disclosure might bring. Lundstedt (1966) has argued that the level of subjectively perceived interpersonal risk in a relationship is affected by the pattern of rewards coming from the exchanges in the interactions such that if past experience has been rewarding, then the amount of subjective risk should be low. Recently, Hlasny & McCarrey (1980) have shown that in a simulated psychotherapeutic situation, clients' and therapist's similarity of values had positive effects on clients' trust of the therapist.…”

Section: A Model For the Role Of Similarity Of Values In Friendship Dmentioning

confidence: 99%

A model for the role of similarity of values in friendship development

Michel¹,

Duck

1982

British J Social Psychol

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Previous research has shown that similarity of values can significantly enhance interpersonal attraction. The present study sought to refine and clarify this finding within the context of friendship development. The relationship between value similarity and friendship choice for subjects was examined cross-sectionally after three periods of acquaintance: 1-2 months, 4-6 months, and 12+ months. Two factors, namely the importance of the values to the sub.jects and the uncommonness of the similarity for them, were hypothesized to affect this relationship. The hypothesis was supported. A further hypothesis was that the salience of these factors for subjects was dependent upon factors that related to the length of their friendships. The results offered only marginal support for this hypothesis. Additional data on unreciprocated friendship choices are presented. The results are discussed in relation to the hypothesized predictive function (to reduce interpersonal risk or uncertainty) as well as thc supportive function of value similarity, and the wider implications of the results are considered.

show abstract

“…This variable has been also treated as a risk and control issue in the marketing discipline (Keeling and McGoldrick, 1997;Burnett and McCollough, 1994;Cox and Rich, 1964). Lundstedt (1966) vividly articulates this by stating that trust is related to the consumers' perceived risk stemming from limited information which is relative to a decision (i.e. making direct purchases).…”

Section: Web-shopping Impedimentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Web‐shoppers and non‐shoppers: compatibility, relative advantage and demographics

Karayanni

2003

European Business Review

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study investigated differences between Webshoppers and non-shoppers, in terms of compatibility, relative advantage and demographics. Stepwise discriminant analysis was applied on a sample of 165 personally interviewed consumers, which showed that compatibility and relative advantage were overall successful, whereas, demographics were unsuccessful, in distinguishing Web-shoppers from non-shoppers. Significant variables included three factors of compatibility (use of direct shopping; use of Web browsing activities at home; and use of Web browsing activities at the office), and two factors of relative advantage (motives; and impediments). Managerial implications for targeting prospective Web-shoppers and designing better-grounded consumer Web-marketing strategies are also discussed, together with study limitations and directions for future research.

show abstract

Interpersonal Risk Theory

Cited by 13 publications

References 5 publications

Interviewer disclosure modeling, information revealed, and interviewee verbal behavior.

Interviewer disclosure modeling, information revealed, and interviewee verbal behavior.

A model for the role of similarity of values in friendship development

Web‐shoppers and non‐shoppers: compatibility, relative advantage and demographics

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About