An Ethnography of Speaking on What Counts as Self-disclosure and How Self-disclosure Functions in the Context of International Advising

論文發表人: 陳雅雯（新墨西哥大學傳播新聞系）

 

http://www.westcomm.org/conventions/past_conventions.asp

此研究用人類學的方式觀察加上訪談去了解自我揭露在輔導國際學生上的作用。研究的主要場合是美國西南部某一四年大學的國際辦公室。依據和國際辦公室裡八名輔導員的訪談，此研究分析出兩個規範輔導員如何用自我揭露來輔導國際學生：同情（the code of empathy）和專業（the code of professionalism）。在這份報告裡我依據社會滲透理論（social penetration theory）來創建一個初步的跨文化友情發展的理論。在此報告裡我聲稱社會滲透理論無法適當地解釋或詮釋跨文化友情發展的過程。於是，我建議將兩個概念融合到社會滲透理論裡來創件一個初步的跨文化友情發展的理論：(a)主客合一（intersubjectivity）和 (b)人際關係循環週期。此研究從創新構想被採用（diffusion of innovations）的觀點來分析英語教學所用的部落格（blogs）之優缺點。本報告主要談討英語教學所用的部落格的五大層面：(a) 相對好處，(b)融合性，(c)複雜程度，(d)可嘗試性，以及(e)可觀察性。最後，本研究探討為何英語教學所用的部落格仍未被大量採用的原因。

 

In response to Wright's (1983) call to investigate fully the self-disclosure process accompanying academic advising relationships, two research questions are proposed to investigate the very process of self-disclosure in international advising relationships in its own context. Methodologically, Hymes' (1962) ethnography of speaking is most appropriate to answer the proposed research questions, because it enables the examination of how international advisors view, understand, and use self-disclosure in their day-to-day interactions with international students. Theoretically, this pilot study is guided by two frameworks that concern culturally situated rules about communication: (a) speech codes theory (e.g. Philipsen, 1992; Philipsen, Coutu & Covarrubias, 2005); and (b) Hymes' (1972) SPEAKING framework. The data for this study come from two primary sources and one supplemental source. The two primary sources are: (a) ethnographic observation at one international student advising office (ISAO) in a large-size university campus in the Southwestern US; and (b) in-depth respondent interviews with available advisors and staff in the focused ISAO. The supplemental source is any available documents that said ISAO present to their international students. Grounded in a speech code perspective and guided by Strauss and Corbin's (1998) constant comparative method, two codes emerged from the data analysis that interacted to govern the process of revealing personal information or self-disclosure. The primary code was labeled "the code of empathy" and the secondary code was labeled "the code of professionalism." Specifically, the forms of self-disclosure governed by the code of empathy are: (a) revealing similar personal experiences; (b) revealing experiences of seeing/advising other students; and (c) revealing personal opinions. On the other hand, the forms of self-disclosure enabled by the code of professionalism are: (a) disclosing "I don't know."; (b) disclosing information about others responsibly; and (c) disclosing information when asked or invited. Finally, implications for speech codes theory, theorizing about self-disclosure across cultures, and international student advising offices (ISAO) are discussed.