With our social lives increasingly experienced online, it is critical to understand online relationship development. The current study examined the outcomes of disclosing stigmatized group membership (i.e., being gay or lesbian) earlier (vs. later) in a developing online relationship. Heterosexuals (n = 214) engaged in an experimentally controlled closeness-inducing online interaction with an ostensible partner, learning that he/she was gay/lesbian either before (i.e., earlier) or after (i.e., later) the interaction. Earlier (vs. later) discovery led to a subjectively more positive contact experience, which predicted heightened bond with the partner, itself predicting more positive attitudes toward the partner. Outcomes were uninfluenced by pretest biases and authoritarianism, suggesting the general benefits of disclosing gay/lesbian identity earlier (vs. later) in online relationships.
AboudF. E.MendelsonM. J.PurdyK. T. (2003). Cross-race peer relations and friendship quality. International Journal of Behavioral Development, 27, 165–173. doi:10.1080/01650250244000164
2.
AikenL. S.WestS. G. (1991). Multiple regression: Testing and interpreting interactions. Newbury Park, CA: Sage Publications.
3.
AltemeyerB. (1996). The authoritarian specter. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
4.
AntheunisM. L.ValkenburgP. M.PeterJ. (2007). Computer-mediated communication and interpersonal attraction: An experimental test of two explanatory hypotheses. CyberPsychology & Behavior, 10, 831–836. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9945
5.
AronA.AronE. N. (1996). Self and self-expansion in relationships. In FletcherG. J. O.FitnessJ. (Eds.), Knowledge structures in close relationships: A social psychological approach (pp. 325–344). Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
6.
AronA.AronE. N.NormanC. (2001). Self-expansion model of motivation and cognition in close relationships and beyond. In ClarkM.FletcherG. (Eds.), Blackwell handbook of social psychology Vol. 2: Interpersonal processes (pp. 478–501). Oxford, UK: Blackwell.
7.
AronA.AronE. N.SmollenD. (1992). Inclusion of Other in the Self Scale and the structure of interpersonal closeness. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 63, 596–612. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.63.4.596
8.
AronA.MelinatE.AronE. N.ValloneR.BatorR. (1997). The experimental generation of interpersonal closeness: A procedure and some preliminary findings. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 23, 363–377. doi:10.1177/0146167297234003
9.
AshtonM. C.LeeK. (2009). The HEXACO-60: A short measure of the major dimensions of personality. Journal of Personality Assessment, 91, 340–345. doi:10.1080/00223890902935878
10.
BarghJ. A.McKennaK. Y. A. (2004). The internet and social life. Annual Review of Psychology, 55, 573–590. doi:10.1146/annurev.psych.55.090902.141922
11.
BeelerJ.DiprovaV. (1999). Family adjustment following disclosure of homosexuality by a member: Themes discerned in narrative accounts. Journal of Marital and Family Therapy, 25, 443–459. doi:10.1111/j.1752-0606.1999.tb00261.x
12.
BogaertA. F. (2004). Asexuality: Its prevalence and associated factors in a national probability sample. The Journal of Sex Research, 41, 279–287. doi:2004-18883-006.
13.
BohanJ. S. (1996). Psychology and sexual orientation: Coming to terms. New York, NY: Routledge.
14.
BrewerM. B.MillerN. (1984). Beyond the contact hypothesis: Theoretical perspectives on desegregation. In MillerN.BrewerM. B. (Eds.), Groups in contact: The psychology of desegregation (pp. 281–302). Orlando, FL: Academic Press.
15.
BrewerM. B.MillerN. (1988). Contact and cooperation: When do they work? In KatzP.TaylorD. (Eds.), Eliminating racism: Profiles in controversy (pp. 315–326). New York, NY: Plenum.
16.
BrodyS. M. (2003). Serving a higher purpose: How service-learning leads to improved intergroup relations. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, University of California, Santa Cruz.
17.
BrownR.HewstoneH. (2005). An integrative theory of intergroup contact. In ZannaM. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 37, pp. 255–343). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
18.
BuckD. M.PlantE. A. (2011). Interorientation interactions and impressions: Does timing of disclosure of sexual orientation matter?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 47, 333–342. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2010.10.016
19.
CainR. (1991). Stigma management and gay identity development. Social Work, 36, 67–73.
20.
CohenJ. (1988). Statistical power analysis for the behavioral sciences (2nd ed.). New Jersey, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.
21.
DaviesK. R.TroppL. R.AronA.PettigrewT. F.WrightS. C. (2011). Cross-group friendships and intergroup attitudes: A meta-analytic review. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 15, 332–351. doi:10.1177/1088868311411103
22.
DaviesK.WrightS.C.AronA.ComeauJ. (2013). Intergroup contact through friendship: Intimacy and norms. In HodsonG.HewstoneM. (Eds.), Advances in intergroup contact (pp. 200–229). London, UK: Psychology Press.
23.
EllisA. L.RiggleE. D. B. (1996). Sexual identity on the job: Issues and services. New York, NY: Haworth Press.
24.
EllisonN.HeinoR.GibbsJ. (2006). Managing impressions online: Self presentation processes in the online dating environment. Journal of Computer Mediated Communication, 11, 415–441.
25.
EnsariN.MillerN. (2002). The out-group must not be so bad after all: The effects of disclosure, typicality, and salience on intergroup bias. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 83, 313–329. doi:10.1037//0022-3514.83.2.313
26.
EverlyB. A.ShihM. J.HoG. C. (2012). Don’t ask, don’t tell? Does disclosure of gay identity affect partner performance?Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 48, 407–410. doi:10.1016/j.jesp.2011.08.005
27.
FinkelE. J.EastwickP. W.KarneyB. R.ReisH. T.SprecherS. (2012). Online dating: A critical analysis from the perspective of psychological science. Psychological Science in the Public Interest, 13, 3–66. doi:10.1177/1529100612436522
28.
FlanaginA. J. (2005). IM online: Instant messaging use among college students. Communication Research Reports, 22, 175–187. doi:10.1080/00036810500206966
29.
FrankeR.LearyM. R. (1991). Disclosure of sexual orientation by lesbians and gay men: A comparison of private and public processes. Journal of Social and Clinical Psychology, 10, 262–269. doi:10.1521/jscp.1991.10.3.262
30.
GriffithK. H.HeblM. R. (2002). The disclosure dilemma for gay men and lesbians: “Coming out” at work. Journal of Applied Psychology, 87, 1191–1199. doi:10.1037//0021-9010.87.6.1191
31.
HaddockG.ZannaM. P. (1998). Authoritarianism, values, and the favorability and structure of antigay attitudes. In HerekG.GregoryM. (Eds.), Stigma and sexual orientation: Understanding prejudice against lesbians, gay men, and bisexuals (pp. 82–107).Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.
32.
HenryP. J. (2008). College sophomores in the laboratory redux: Influences of a narrow database on social psychology’s view of the nature of prejudice. Psychological Inquiry, 19, 49–71. doi:10.1080/10478400802049936
33.
HerekG. M. (1988). Heterosexuals’ attitudes toward lesbians and gay men: Correlates and gender differences. Journal of Sex Research, 25, 451–477. doi:10.1080/00224498809551476
34.
HerekG. M.CapitanioJ. P. (1996). Some of my best friends: Intergroup contact, concealable stigma, and heterosexuals attitudes towards gay men and lesbians. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 412–424. doi:10.1177/0146167296224007
35.
HewstoneM.BrownR. (1986). Contact is not enough: An intergroup perspective on the ‘Contact Hypothesis’. In HewstoneM.BrownR. (Eds.) Contact and conflict in intergroup encounters (pp. 1–44). New York, NY: Basil Blackwell.
36.
HodsonG.HarryH.MitchellA. (2009). Independent benefits of contact and friendship on attitudes toward homosexuals among authoritarians and highly identified heterosexuals. European Journal of Social Psychology, 39, 509–525. doi:10.1002/ ejsp.5582009-07691-002
37.
HornseyM. J.JettenJ. (2003). Not being what you claim to be: Impostors as source of group threat. European Journal of Social Psychology, 33, 639–657. doi:10.1002/ejsp.176
JettenJ.SummervilleN.HornseyM. J.MewseA. J. (2005). When differences matter: Intergroup distinctiveness and the evaluation of impostors. EuropeanJournal of Social Psychology, 35, 609–620. doi:10.1002/ejsp.282
40.
JohnsonK. L.GillS.ReichmanV.TassinaryL. G. (2007). Swagger, sway, and sexuality: Judging sexual orientation from body motion and morphology. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 321–334. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.321
41.
KaufmanG. F.LibbyL. K. (2012). Changing beliefs and behaviour through experience taking. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 103, 1–19. doi:10.1037/a0027525
42.
KingE. B.ReillyC.HeblM. (2008). The best of times, the worst of times: Exploring dual perspectives of “coming out” in the work place. Group & Organization Management, 33, 566–601. doi:10.1177/1059601108321834
43.
KiteM. E.WhitleyB. E. (1996). Sex differences in attitudes toward homosexual persons, behaviors, and civil rights: A meta-analysis. Personality & Social Psychology Bulletin, 22, 336–353. doi:1996-03176-002
44.
KlineR. B. (2011). Principles and practice of structural equation modeling (3rd ed.). New York, NY: Guilford Press.
45.
KronenbergerG. K. (1991). Out of the closet. Personnel Journal, 70, 40–44.
46.
LaumannE.GagnonJ. H.MichaelR. T.MichaelsS. (1994). The social organization of sexuality: Sexual practices in the United States. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
47.
LearyM. R.SpringerC. A. (2000). Hurt feelings: The neglected emotion. In KowalskiR. (Ed.), Aversive behaviors and interpersonal transgression (pp. 151–175). Washington, DC: American Psychological Association.
48.
MacDonaldG.KingsburyR.ShawS. (2005). Adding insult to injury: Social pain theory and response to social exclusion. In WilliamsK. D.ForgasJ. P.von HippelW. (Eds.), The social outcast: Ostracism, social exclusion, rejection, & bullying (pp. 77–90). New York, NY: Psychology Press.
49.
MacDonaldG.LearyM. R. (2005). Why does social exclusion hurt? The relationship between social and physical pain. Psychological Bulletin, 131, 202–223. doi:10.1037/0033-2909.131.2.202
McKennaK. Y. A.GreenA. S.GleasonM. E. J. (2002). Relationship formation on the Internet: What’s the big attraction?Journal of Social Issues, 58, 9–31. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00246
52.
MillerN. (2002). Personalization and the promise of contact theory. Journal of Social Issues, 58, 387–410. doi:10.1111/1540-4560.00267
53.
MullerD.JuddC. M.YzerbytV. Y. (2005). When moderation is mediated and mediation is moderated. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 89, 852–863. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.89.6.852
54.
Page-GouldE.Mendoza-DentonR.TroppL. R. (2008). With a little help from my cross-group friend: Reducing anxiety in intergroup contexts through cross-group friendship. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1080–1094. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.95.5.1080.
55.
ParksM. R.FloydK. (1996). Making friends in cyberspace. Journal of Communication, 46, 80–97. doi:10.1111/j.1460-2466.1996.tb01462.x
PreacherK. J.KelleyK. (2011). Effect size measures for mediation models: Quantitative strategies for communicating indirect effects. Psychological Methods, 16, 93–115. doi:10.1037/a0022658
60.
Radicati Group Inc. (2012). Email statistics report 2012–2016. Retrieved January 15, 2013 fromhttp://www.radicati.com/?p=8262
61.
ReisH. T.WheelerL. (1991). Studying social interaction with the Rochester interaction record. In ZannaM. P. (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 24, pp. 269–318). San Diego, CA: Academic Press.
62.
RidingsC. M.GefenD. (2004). Virtual community attraction: Why people hang out online. Journal of Computer-Mediated Communication, 10. doi:10.1111/j.1083-6101.2004.tb00229.x
63.
RudeJ.HerdaD. (2010). Best friends forever?: Race and the stability of adolescent friendships. Social Forces, 89, 565–607. doi:10.1353/sof.2010.0059
64.
SchneiderB. H.DixonK.UdvariS. (2007). Closeness and competition in inter-ethnic and co-ethnic friendships of early adolescents in Toronto and Montreal. Journal of Early Adolescence, 27, 115–138. doi:10.1177/0272431606294822
65.
SedikidesC.CampbellK. W.ReaderG. D.ElliotA. J. (1999). The relationship closeness induction task. Representative Research in Social Psychology, 23, 1–4.
66.
TabakJ. A.ZayasV. (2012). The roles of featural and configural face processing in snap judgements of sexual orientation. PloS One, 7, e36671. doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0036671
67.
TurnerR. N.HewstoneM.VociA. (2007). Reducing explicit and implicit outgroup prejudice via direct and extended contact: The mediating role of self-disclosure and intergroup anxiety. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 93, 369–388. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.93.3.369
68.
UtzS. (2005). Types of deception and underlying motivation: What people think. Social Science Computer Review, 23, 49–56. doi:10.1177/0894439304271534
69.
ValkenburgP. M.PeterJ. (2007). Who visits online dating sites? Exploring some characteristics of online dater. Cyber Psychology & Behavior, 10, 849–852. doi:10.1089/cpb.2007.9941
70.
VociA.HewstoneM. (2003). Intergroup contact and prejudice towards immigrants in Italy: The mediational role of anxiety and the moderational role of group salience. Group Processes and Intergroup Relations, 6, 37–54. doi:10.1177/1368430203006001011
71.
VonofakouC.HewstoneM.VociA. (2007). Contact with outgroup friends as a predictor of meta-attitudinal strength and accessibility of attitudes toward gay men. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 92, 804–820. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.92.5.804
72.
WarnerR.HornseyM. J.JettenJ. (2007). Why minority group members resent impostors. European Journal of Social Psychology, 37, 1–17. doi:10.1002/ejsp.332
73.
WellsJ. W.KlineW. B. (1987). Self-disclosure of homosexual orientation. Journal of Social Psychology, 127, 191–197. doi:10.1080/00224545.1987.9713679
74.
WrightS. C.AronA.McLaughlin-VolpeT.RoppS. A. (1997). The extended contact effect: Knowledge of cross-group friendships and prejudice. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 73, 73–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.73.1.73
75.
WrightS. C.AronA.TroppL. R. (2002). Including others (and their groups) in the self: Self-expansion theory and intergroup relations. In ForgasJ. P.WilliamsK. (Eds.) The social self: Cognitive, interpersonal and intergroup perspectives. Philadelphia, PA: Psychology Press.
76.
WrightS. C.BrodyS. A.AronA. (2005). Intergroup contact: Still our best hope for reducing prejudice. In CrandallC. S.SchallerM. (Eds.), The social psychology of prejudice: Historical perspectives (pp. 115–142). Seattle, WA: Lewinian Press.
77.
ZakrissonI. (2005). Construction of a short version of the Right-Wing Authoritarianism (RWA) scale. Personality and Individual Differences, 39, 863–872. doi:10.1016/j.paid.2005.02.02
