[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":3,"doc-seo-143142-105":59,"doc-detail-143142-en":131},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"success",[7,13,18,23,28,33,38,43,48,51,55],{"id":8,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":10,"show_sort_weight":11,"slug":12},1,"Document","Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":14,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":15,"show_sort_weight":16,"slug":17},2,"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":19,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":20,"show_sort_weight":21,"slug":22},4,"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":24,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":25,"show_sort_weight":26,"slug":27},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":29,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":30,"show_sort_weight":31,"slug":32},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":34,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":35,"show_sort_weight":36,"slug":37},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":39,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":40,"show_sort_weight":41,"slug":42},8,"Research & Report",30,"research-report",{"id":44,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":45,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":47},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":46,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":49,"show_sort_weight":46,"slug":50},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":52,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":53,"show_sort_weight":52,"slug":54},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":56,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":9,"category_name":57,"show_sort_weight":24,"slug":58},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":60,"data":61},"ok",{"site_id":62,"language":63,"slug":64,"title":65,"keywords":66,"description":67,"schema_data":68,"social_meta":124,"head_meta":126,"extra_data":128,"updated_unix":130},105,"en","its-both-what-you-shared-and-the-way-you-shared-it-secret-sharing-and-interpersonal-evaluations-thesis-master-of-arts","It’s Both What You Shared and the Way You Shared It - Secret-Sharing and Interpersonal Evaluations - Thesis (Master of Arts)","","Sharing secrets is common in everyday life, but the processes linking secret-sharing behaviors to how we evaluate others remain underexplored. This thesis studies evaluations of secret-sharers based on secret type (personal vs. secondhand), sharer relationship (close friend vs. acquaintance), and sharing breadth (exclusive vs. nonexclusive). Participants read vignettes and rated trustworthiness, closeness, and social utility. Study 1 shows personal secrets increase trustworthiness and closeness, while secondhand secrets increase social utility. Study 2 reveals interactions: nonexclusive personal secrets reduce closeness, nonexclusive secondhand secrets reduce trustworthiness, and social utility peaks for nonexclusive personal sharing.",{"@graph":69,"@context":123},[70,84,106],{"@type":71,"itemListElement":72},"BreadcrumbList",[73,77,79,82],{"item":74,"name":75,"@type":76,"position":8},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",{"item":78,"name":9,"@type":76,"position":14},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/",{"item":80,"name":40,"@type":76,"position":81},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/",3,{"item":83,"name":65,"@type":76,"position":19},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/its-both-what-you-shared-and-the-way-you-shared-it-secret-sharing-and-interpersonal-evaluations-thesis-master-of-arts/143142/",{"url":83,"name":65,"@type":85,"image":86,"author":91,"headline":65,"publisher":94,"fileFormat":97,"inLanguage":63,"description":67,"dateModified":98,"datePublished":99,"encodingFormat":97,"isAccessibleForFree":100,"interactionStatistic":101},"DigitalDocument",{"url":87,"@type":88,"width":89,"height":90},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/its-both-what-you-shared-and-the-way-you-shared-it-secret-sharing-and-interpersonal-evaluations-thesis-master-of-arts/143142.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":92,"@type":93},"Aurelia","Person",{"url":74,"name":95,"@type":96},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-21","2026-08-25",true,{"@type":102,"interactionType":103,"userInteractionCount":105},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":104},"ViewAction",11,{"@type":107,"mainEntity":108},"FAQPage",[109,115,119],{"name":110,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":112},"How do participants evaluate secret-sharers in the study?","Question",{"text":113,"@type":114},"Participants read brief vignettes and rate the secret-sharer on trustworthiness, closeness with the recipient, and social utility.","Answer",{"name":116,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":117},"What does Study 1 find about personal versus secondhand secrets?",{"text":118,"@type":114},"Sharing a personal secret leads to higher trustworthiness and closeness than sharing a secondhand secret, while sharing a secondhand secret leads to higher social utility.",{"name":120,"@type":111,"acceptedAnswer":121},"How does sharing breadth (exclusive vs. nonexclusive) change evaluation outcomes?",{"text":122,"@type":114},"Study 2 finds interactions between secret type and sharing breadth: nonexclusive personal sharing decreases closeness ratings, and nonexclusive secondhand sharing decreases trustworthiness ratings; social utility is highest for nonexclusive personal sharing.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":83,"og:type":125,"og:title":65,"og:site_name":95,"og:description":67},"article",{"robots":127,"canonical":83},"index,follow",{"doc_id":129,"site_id":62},143142,1787693290,{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":132},{"doc_id":129,"user_id":133,"nickname":92,"user_avatar":134,"doc_module":4,"category_id":39,"category_name":40,"doc_title":65,"doc_description":67,"doc_content":135,"file_id":136,"file_url":137,"file_type":138,"file_size":139,"view_count":105,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":8,"is_downloadable":8,"audit_status":8,"page_count":140,"language":141,"language_code":63,"site_id":62,"html_lang":63,"table_of_contents":142,"faqs":143,"seo_title":144,"seo_description":67,"update_tm":130,"read_time":145,"preview_page_count":4},1099514068365,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/avatar/10000253d8d9f28188e?_k=1776742907772140068","UC Santa Barbara  \nUC Santa Barbara Electronic Theses and Dissertations  \nTitle  \nIt's Both What You Said and the Way You Said It: Secret-Sharing and Interpersonal Evaluations  \nPermalink  \n[https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7569c203](https://escholarship.org/uc/item/7569c203)  \nAuthor  \nBedrov, Alisa  \nPublication Date  \n2021  \nPeer reviewed|Thesis/dissertation  \n[eScholarship.org](eScholarship.org) Powered by the California Digital Library  \nUniversity of California  \nUNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA  \nSanta Barbara  \nIt’s Both What You Shared and the Way You Shared It: Secret-Sharing and Interpersonal  \nEvaluations  \nA Thesis submitted in partial satisfaction of the  \nrequirements for the degree Master of Arts  \nin Psychological & Brain Sciences  \nby  \nAlisa Bedrov  \nCommittee in charge:  \nProfessor Shelly L. Gable, Chair  \nProfessor Nancy Collins  \nProfessor Zoe Liberman  \nJune 2021  \nThe thesis of Alisa Bedrov is approved.  \nNancy Collins  \nZoe Liberman  \nShelly L. Gable, Committee Chair  \nABSTRACT  \nIt’s Both What You Shared and the Way You Shared It: Secret-Sharing and Interpersonal  \nEvaluations  \nby  \nAlisa Bedrov  \nSharing secrets is common in everyday life, yet we know relatively little about how secretsharing behaviors influence evaluations ofthose who share secrets. The present studies examined how we evaluate others based on the type of secret (personal vs. secondhand), who shares the secret (close friend vs. acquaintance), and its sharing breadth (exclusive vs. nonexclusive). Participants read brief vignettes about a secret being shared and evaluated the secret-sharer on trustworthiness, closeness with the recipient, and social utility. In Study 1, sharing a personal secret led to higher ratings of trustworthiness and closeness relative to sharing a secondhand secret, regardless of who shared the secret, and sharing a secondhand secret led to higher ratings of social utility. In Study 2, we found a consistent interaction between secret type and sharing breadth. Compared to sharing a secret exclusively with one person, sharing a personal secret nonexclusively decreased closeness ratings, and sharing a secondhand secret nonexclusively decreased trustworthiness ratings. Lastly, social utility was highest for sharing a personal secret nonexclusively. These findings suggest that both the type of secret and how many people it is shared with have important implications for intimacy and trust in close relationships, as well as demonstrating social value.  \nTABLE OF CONTENTS  \nI. Background .............................................................................................................. 1  \nA. Self-Disclosure and Gossip vs. Personal and Secondhand Secrets ...... 1  \nB. Social Implications of Secret-Sharing................................................... 2  \n1. Trustworthiness................................................................................ 3  \n2. Closeness ......................................................................................... 4  \n3. Social Utility .................................................................................... 5  \nC. Overview of Studies .............................................................................. 6  \nII. Study 1: Secret Type & Relationship Level............................................................ 7  \nA. Method .................................................................................................. 7  \nB. Results ................................................................................................... 9  \nC. Discussion ........................................................................................... 10  \nIII. Study 2: Secret Type & Sharing Breadth ............................................................ 11  \nA. Method ................................................................................................ 11  \nB. Results ..........................................................................","cbCaimc4RVXgrRDp","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaimc4RVXgrRDp","pdf",603412,38,"English","# Background\n## Self-Disclosure and Gossip vs. Personal and Secondhand Secrets\n## Social Implications of Secret-Sharing\n## Overview of Studies\n# Study 1: Secret Type & Relationship Level\n## Method\n## Results\n## Discussion\n# Study 2: Secret Type & Sharing Breadth\n## Method\n## Results\n## Discussion\n# General Discussion\n# References\n# Appendix","[{\"question\":\"How do participants evaluate secret-sharers in the study?\",\"answer\":\"Participants read brief vignettes and rate the secret-sharer on trustworthiness, closeness with the recipient, and social utility.\"},{\"question\":\"What does Study 1 find about personal versus secondhand secrets?\",\"answer\":\"Sharing a personal secret leads to higher trustworthiness and closeness than sharing a secondhand secret, while sharing a secondhand secret leads to higher social utility.\"},{\"question\":\"How does sharing breadth (exclusive vs. nonexclusive) change evaluation outcomes?\",\"answer\":\"Study 2 finds interactions between secret type and sharing breadth: nonexclusive personal sharing decreases closeness ratings, and nonexclusive secondhand sharing decreases trustworthiness ratings; social utility is highest for nonexclusive personal sharing.\"}]","It’s Both What You Shared and the Way You Shared It - Secret-Sharing and Interpersonal Evaluations - Thesis (Master of Arts) | PDF",96]