Abstract
In this study two models were constructed to test the link between the chilling effect and family members' continued concealment of secrets. The direct effects model suggests that coercive power in families has a direct influence on family members' concealment, such that it suppresses the desire to reveal sensitive information for fear of negative consequences. In contrast, the indirect effects model contends that coercive power diminishes family members' closeness and commitment to one another, which in turn, compels them to want to continue to conceal negative secrets. For families in general, the results supported the direct effects model. This study also assessed how these models applied to conformity– and conversation-oriented families.
Notes
Tamara D. Afifi (formerly Golish) (Ph.D., University of Nebraska-Lincoln) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication Arts and Sciences at The Pennsylvania State University. Loreen Olson (Ph.D., University of Nebraska-Lincoln) is an Assistant Professor in the Department of Communication at the University of Missouri. This research was partially supported by a faculty research development grant from Cleveland State University.
[1] While two data collection methods were used in this study, most of the families were recruited through the second form of data collection of having undergraduates recruit the families. Consequently, there was not enough power to test for significant differences between the two samples.
[2] The average correlations among family members for influence power, oppressive power, physical aggression, and symbolic aggression were .44, .38, .41, and .36, respectively. The mean correlation for conversation orientation was .52 and the mean correlation for conformity orientation was .44. The average correlation for concealment was .46.