The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
The Revelation Risk Model (RRM): Factors that Predict the Revelation of Secrets and the Strategies Used to Reveal Them
Abstract
The primary goal of this manuscript is to advance a new risk revelation model (RRM) that explains the factors that predict when people will reveal or continue to conceal secrets. We propose, among other things, that people assess the risks involved with the disclosure of secrets and that this risk assessment is what predicts people's “readiness” or willingness to reveal them. People are more willing to reveal their secrets under certain conditions: (1) for catharsis, (2) if the target needs to know/has the right to know the information, and (3) if other people (including the target) are encouraging the person to reveal the secret. Finally, the RRM assumes that people are more willing to actually reveal their secret when they have communication efficacy or they believe they have the ability to talk about it. The second goal of this manuscript was to use the RRM to predict the types of strategies people use to reveal their secrets. As a part of this process, we also generated an exhaustive list (and corresponding scale) of the strategies people use to reveal their secrets, which was the final goal of the manuscript. The findings and implications of the RRM and the strategies for revealment are discussed.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Paradoxical effects of thought suppression.
Wegner, D. M., Schneider, D. J., Carter, S. R., & White, T. L. (1987) · Journal of Personality and Social Psychology · doi:10.1037//0022-3514.53.1.5 · Cited by 2,127
Experimental disclosure and its moderators: A meta-analysis.
Frattaroli, J. (2006) · Psychological Bulletin · doi:10.1037/0033-2909.132.6.823 · Cited by 1,502
Toward a Theory of Motivated Information Management
Afifi, W. A., & Weiner, J. L. (2004) · Communication Theory · doi:10.1111/j.1468-2885.2004.tb00310.x · Cited by 683
Cited by
Brief Status Report on Communication Privacy Management Theory
Petronio, S. (2013) · Journal of Family Communication · doi:10.1080/15267431.2013.743426 · Cited by 277
Carpenter, A., & Greene, K. (2015) · The International Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication · doi:10.1002/9781118540190.wbeic160 · Cited by 132
Self‐Censorship as a Socio‐Political‐Psychological Phenomenon: Conception and Research
Bar‐Tal, D. (2017) · Political Psychology · doi:10.1111/pops.12391 · Cited by 127
Rafferty, K. A., Hutton, K., & Heller, S. (2019) · Health Communication · doi:10.1080/10410236.2017.1384432 · Cited by 31
Metadata
- Authors
- Afifi, T., & Steuber, K.
- Venue
- Communication Monographs
- Publisher
- Informa UK Limited
- Published
- 2009-05-13
- Volume
- 76
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 144-176
- ISSN
- 0363-7751 (ISSN-L)
- 1479-5787
- OpenAlex
- W2026113750
- Cited by
- 219
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 10.11
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: The Revelation Risk Model (RRM): Factors that Predict the Revelation of Secrets and the Strategies Used to Reveal Them. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1080/03637750902828412
- The paper
- Afifi, T., & Steuber, K. (2009). The Revelation Risk Model (RRM): Factors that Predict the Revelation of Secrets and the Strategies Used to Reveal Them. Communication Monographs. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637750902828412
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.