Science for Education Today, 2020, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 109–123

Characteristics of self-disclosure of full-time and part-time students in the process pursuing university degrees: a comparative analysis

Omelchenko E. A. 1 (Novosibirsk, Russian Federation), Churekova T. M. 2 (Kemerovo, Russian Federation), Pagliara S. M. 3 (Warwick, United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland), Agavelyan R. O. 1 (Novosibirsk, Russian Federation)
1 Novosibirsk state pedagogical University
2 Kemerovo state Institute of culture
3 University of Warwick, School of engineering

Introduction. The article deals with the problem of students' self-disclosure in the process of higher education. The purpose of the study is to compare the peculiarities of self-disclosure of full-time and part-time students, manifested in the educational process of the university.
Materials and Methods. The methodological basis of the study included the works of Russian and foreign authors on the importance of self-disclosure of personality, its characteristics and fulfillment (I. P. Shkuratova, G. J. Chelune, etc.). The research methods included theoretical analysis and generalization of modern Russian and international studies on self-disclosure of personality. The empirical study was conducted using the self-disclosure diagnostic technique (I. P. Shkuratova). The sample consisted of 203 respondents.
Results. The theoretical analysis of studies devoted to the problem of self-disclosure revealed its external and internal features. At the same time, modern students tend to express themselves both in direct interaction and using digital technologies (e.g., social networks). Direct and technically mediated interactions are the environments of students’ self-disclosure.
The authors analyzed the categories and motives of self-disclosure of full-time and part-time students. The comparative analysis of data obtained during the empirical research revealed both similarities and differences. The similarities include the following: firstly, the desire to discuss interests, inclinations, and express opinions. Secondly, the most frequent motive of self-disclosure is the interest in the partner of communication.
The first difference is that the desire to discuss financial issues is highly significant for full-time students, on the other hand, the disclosure of information about their jobs and various difficulties are important for part-time students. The second difference concerns the motives for self-disclosure. Full-time students report practical motives for self-disclosure. Emotional and moral motives and motives of self-presentation are more important for part-time students. The third difference showed the unwillingness of full-time students to discuss study issues, and it concerns the financial side of life for part-time students.
Conclusions. The authors conclude that self-disclosure of full-time and part-time students has similarities and differences.
Taking into account the characteristics of students’ self-disclosure and providing opportunities for its fulfillment in the process of higher education contribute to the formation of students’ professional identity and commitment, and enhance their professional development.

For citation:
Omelchenko E. A., Churekova T. M., Pagliara S. M., Agavelyan R. O. Characteristics of self-disclosure of full-time and part-time students in the process pursuing university degrees: a comparative analysis. Science for Education Today, 2020, vol. 10, no. 4, pp. 109–123. DOI:
  1. Abakumova I. V., Mironenkova N. N., Pen'kov D. V. Meaning techniques oriented towards students’ subjective experience as the basis for their value-meaning choices: A case of studies in mathematics. Russian Psychological Journal, 2019, vol. 16 (2), pp. 63–80. (In Russian) DOI:  URL:
  2. Afanasyeva A. S. The interaction between different forms of learning and mental development of students. Actual Problems and Prospects for the Development of Modern Psychology, 2018, no. 1, pp. 8–12. (In Russian) URL:
  3. Ippolitova N. V., Sterkhova N. S. Analysis of the notion “pedagogical conditions”: essence and classification. General and Professional Education, 2012, no. 1, pp. 8–14. (In Russian) URL:
  4. Lisitsky D. V., Osipov A. G., Kicheev V. G., Savinykh V. N., Makarenko N. N. Dynamics of higher education paradigms in Russia (from the end of the 19th century to the beginning of the 21st century). Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2017, vol. 7 (3), pp. 157–175. (In Russian) DOI:  URL:
  5. Malakhova V. R., Chernyavskaya V. S. Psychological Mechanism of Personality Self-Disclosure in General Education. Scientific Notes of the Transbaikal State University, 2019, vol. 14 (1), pp. 105–110. (In Russian) DOI: URL:
  6. Omelchenko E. A., Chesnokova G. S., Agavelyan R. O. Self-expression within the value system of prospective preschool educators. Novosibirsk State Pedagogical University Bulletin, 2018, vol. 8 (1), pp. 7–22. (In Russian) DOI: URL:
  7. Omelchenko E. A. The formation of the self-expression’s culture components of students of teacher training university as a condition of their professional self-realization. Siberian Pedagogical Journal, 2017, no. 1, pp. 78–83. (In Russian) URL:
  8. Sapon I. V., Ledenev D. E. Self-disclosure on social network sites: a theoretical review. Bulletin of the Novosibirsk State University of Economics and Management, 2018, no. 3, pp. 267–288. (In Russian) URL:
  9. Cheremiskina I. I., Koldina E. V. Abilities of self-revelation by the students of creative directions of preparation: retrospective analysis. The Territory of New Opportunities. The Herald of Vladivostok State University of Economics and Service, 2019, vol. 11 (3), рp. 190–197. (In Russian) DOI: URL:

10. Bolívar-Cruz A., Verano-Tacoronte D. Self-assessment of the oral presentation competence: Effects of gender and student’s performance. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 2018, vol. 59, pp. 94–101. DOI:

11. Chen L., Hu N., Shu C., Chen X. Adult attachment and self-disclosure on social networking site: A content analysis of Sina Weibo. Personality and Individual Differences, 2019, vol. 138, pp. 96–105. DOI:

12. Chen W., Xie X.-C., Ping F., Wang M.-Z. Personality differences in online and offline self-disclosure preference among adolescents: A person-oriented approach. Personality and Individual Differences, 2017, vol. 105, pp. 175–178. DOI:

13. Huang H.-Y. Examining the beneficial effects of individual's self-disclosure on the social network site. Computers in Human Behavior, 2016, vol. 57, pp. 122–132. DOI:

14. Krämer N. C., Schäwel J. Mastering the challenge of balancing self-disclosure and privacy in social media. Current Opinion in Psychology, 2020, vol. 31, pp. 67–71. DOI:

15. Lin R., Utz S. Self-disclosure on SNS: Do disclosure intimacy and narrativity influence interpersonal closeness and social attraction? Computers in Human Behavior, 2017, vol. 70, pp. 426–436. DOI:

16. Luo M., Hancock J. T. Self-disclosure and social media: motivations, mechanisms and psychological well-being. Current Opinion in Psychology, 2020, vol. 31, pp. 110–115. DOI:

17. Oghazi P., Schultheiss R., Chirumalla K., Kalmer N. P., Rad F. F. User self-disclosure on social network sites: A cross-cultural study on Facebook’s privacy concepts. Journal of Business Research, 2020, vol. 112, pp. 531–540. DOI:

18. O'Sullivan P. B., Carr C. T. Masspersonal communication: A model bridging the mass-interpersonal divide. New Media & Society, 2018, vol. 20 (3), pp. 1161–1180. DOI:

19. Pang H. Microblogging, friendship maintenance, and life satisfaction among university students: The mediatory role of online self-disclosure. Telematics and Informatics, 2018, vol. 35 (8), pp. 2232–2241. DOI:

20. Saling L. L., Cohen D. B., Cooper D. Not close enough for comfort: Facebook users eschew high intimacy negative disclosures. Personality and Individual Differences, 2019, vol. 142, pp. 103–109. DOI:

21. Shane-Simpson C., Manago A., Gaggi N., Gillespie-Lynch K. Why do college students prefer Facebook, Twitter, or Instagram? Site affordances, tensions between privacy and self-expression, and implications for social capital. Computers in Human Behavior, 2018, vol. 86, pp. 276–288. DOI:

22. Schlosser A. E. Self-disclosure versus self-presentation on social media. Current Opinion in Psychology, 2020, vol. 31, pp. 1–6. DOI:

23. Truong C., Gallo J., Roter D., Joo J. The role of self-disclosure by peer mentors: Using personal narratives in depression care. Patient Education and Counseling, 2019, vol. 102 (7), pp. 1273–1279. DOI:

24. Zhang R. The stress-buffering effect of self-disclosure on Facebook: An examination of stressful life events, social support, and mental health among college students. Computers in Human Behavior, 2017, vol. 75, pp. 527–537. DOI:

Date of the publication 31.08.2020