Rodgers 1

Hannah Rodgers
Professor Mattson
Comm 301
23 April 2018
Critical Essay
Social penetration theory is a communication theory that is useful in everyday life. Social

penetration theory was written by Irwin Altman and Dalmas A. Taylor (Altman). It is about

relationships between two people. Social penetration theory is about how a relationship transfers

from a superficial relationship to a more intimate and personal relationship. There are many

layers to a person. This theory talks about how a person becomes more intimate with the other

person and peels back layers of themselves to get to the core of who they are (Carpenter).There

are also assumptions about this theory and a criticism. This essay will look at what social

penetration theory is, the assumptions, a criticism, and a case study that I observed in my life.

A positive aspect of social penetration theory is the metaphor of the layers of an onion.

When one is opening themselves up to another person, then there are multiple layers to the

amount of intimacy. For example, the first layer may be facts about the person, like their favorite

color and food. The middle layers consist of things like political views and social attitudes. The

next layers consist of things like spiritual values and fears, as well as, hopes, goals, and secrets.

Finally, the person will get to the core. The core is the most intimate detail about themselves.

The core is the most private things about themselves (Carpenter). Everyone moves through these

layers at their own pace. Personally, I go through these layers slowly because I want to make

sure that I know that I can trust the other person.

Theories are very useful. They help us to understand why we do the things that we do. If

we understand the reason why we do things, then we can learn more about ourselves. For
 Rodgers 2

example, for social penetration theory, we can understand better why we start becoming personal

when the other person becomes personal first. For me, I usually start opening up to someone

when the other person opens up to me. After I read about social penetration theory, I realized that

I do that and why I do that. Reading this theory also helped me realize that I feel more

comfortable opening up about myself when I am comfortable with the other person. Theories are

also very useful to help challenge people. Reading about social penetration theory also

challenged me. It challenged me to open up to someone sooner than I usually do. Theories help

us to understand more about ourselves and it challenges us. Reading and learning about social

penetration theory helped me learn more about myself and how I open up to people and it

challenged me to become a better person.

An important aspect of theories is assumptions about that theory. Assumptions are

different for every theory. For social penetration theory, assumptions are based upon three

things. They are: language, ethics, and human nature. It is important to know assumptions based

in these areas because they will help us understand the theory better and analyze it better.

Therefore, the next section of this essay will focus on the assumptions of social penetration

theory within these four areas. They will result in a better understanding of social penetration

theory.

Social penetration has language assumptions. There are two important parts of social

penetration theory. The first is breadth. This refers to the amount of topics discussed. The second

part of social penetration theory is depth. This is referring to how deep and intimate the

discussion and topic gets. This is like layers of an onion. The outer layer is less personal things,

like ones favorite color. Then, as one gets more intimate, it is like the inner layers of the onion.

The more personal information is at the core of the onion, this is information that makes a person
 Rodgers 3

vulnerable (Altman, page 15-18). This is an important assumption in social penetration theory.

The amount one wants to be vulnerable with someone affects the language that one will share

with the other person. If one does not want to be vulnerable, then they will not use a language

that is personal. If one does want to be vulnerable with someone, then they will use a language

that is more personal and intimate. A benefit for everyday life is to know if one wants to be

vulnerable and intimate with someone because that will affect what language they will use with

that person.

Also, social penetration theory has ethical assumptions. A big part of social penetration

theory is the “norm of reciprocity” (Carpenter, page 1). Reciprocity is “when a person discloses

something, the responder is obligated to disclose something at the same level of intimacy to

maintain the norm or equity” (Carpenter, page 1-2).This is an ethical assumption because when

one is personal and vulnerable to someone, then the other person feels like it is the moral thing to

share something about themselves. I personally do not think that one should share intimate and

personal information about themselves just because the other person does. One should share

personal and vulnerable information about themselves because they are comfortable with the

other person. Reciprocity is saying that it is the moral and ethical thing to share personal

information with someone based on the fact that the other person shares personal information.

Social penetration theory is about being intimate and sharing personal information with

someone, but they should not feel morally obligated to share personal things. People should

share things because they feel comfortable with the other person. People need to feel comfortable

around their peers because they interact with them everyday.

There are also moral dilemmas that people have to deal with. Just like there are layers for

sharing personal information, there are layers of moral dilemmas. The first layer is the superficial
 Rodgers 4

or peripheral issues layer. This layer is about deciding whether or not the dilemma are minor or

major dilemmas. The second layer is commitment and satisfaction. This layer is when one

assesses the outcome of the dilemma and whether or not there are rewards or costs of the

concern. The final layer, which is at the core, is behavioral responses. If the first two stages have

patterns of intimacy, then that will determine the ethical or unethical response that the person has

to the moral dilemma. If the first two levels have negative feelings, then greater intimacy will be

harder to accomplish (Baack). These layers are valuable to know for everyday life because it

helps us know what layer we are at when we talk with another person.

Thirdly, there are also human nature assumptions. The assumption about social

penetration theory is about human behaviors. “The development of a social bond involves

behaviors from several levels of functioning—perceptual/ cognitive, verbal, nonverbal, and

environmentally oriented responses” (Altman, page 22). It is human nature to have all kinds of

responses in a relationship. The type of relationship that people have will determine the kind of

responses that one gives. There will be different kinds of verbal and nonverbal responses with

different people because they have a different relationship than they do with other people. It is in

one’s human nature to respond in certain ways. For example, if one person jumps out right in

front of someone, then the person may respond verbally and screaming and nonverbally by

jumping themselves. This assumption is a positive aspect of social penetration theory because it

is in everyone’s human nature to respond their own way to certain things and people.

While social penetration theory is valuable for understanding everyday life, there is also a

weakness that should be probed. Social penetration theory is very dyadic and only considers

relationships between two people. I would have liked to also learn about relationships in a group

setting, which is part of everyday life. For example, I act differently in a group setting than with
 Rodgers 5

a single person. I am more intimate when I am talking to just one person. When I am having a

conversation in a group, it is harder for me to share more details about myself because there are

more voices in the group. Therefore, I would have liked Altman and Taylor to expand on

relationships that are more than just two people.

I decided to observe my own experience of social penetration theory. I decided to observe

my relationship with my new roommate. I will not go into details about what was shared

between us, but about the process of how we started to open up to each other. In January, I got a

new roommate. I did not know her at all. She was a commuter and decided to stay on campus

this semester. Since I did not know her, I decided to observe how we would be intimate with

each other and when we would be intimate with each other. This observation on my relationship

with my new roommate helped me to understand and examine social penetration theory better.

Right from the beginning, she was very open with me. She would tell me stuff that I was

not too comfortable to tell anyone in a new relationship. This enabled me to want to spend more

time with her and get to know her better and for me to start opening up to her. We did not go into

details, but we were able to just start opening up about ourselves to each other. The first night of

the semester, we did not have any homework or any stresses from school, so we decided to

watch a Netflix together. She let me pick what to watch and I asked her if she had watched

Grey’s Anatomy. She said that she had not seen it, but wanted to try it. Therefore, we decided to

watch the pilot of Grey’s Anatomy and that is how our relationship got started. We were able to

start a relationship just by watching Netflix and opening up a little bit about ourselves.

When the business of the semester started, we did not really have time to just sit and talk

to each other for hours, but we found time to have little conversations within the day. We would

have conversations in front of the mirror in the morning when we both would be getting ready
 Rodgers 6

for the day. We would be able to share more about ourselves. Then, on February 5, we decided to

go to dinner together. We were able to go into more details that we were learning from the first

day we became roommates. After dinner, she went to class and when she came back to the room

after class, we just had a fun conversation with each other and she would share about what

happened in class. At this point, she had become comfortable enough with me to ask me where

the toilet paper on our floor was. She did not know where it was and it took a few weeks for her

to ask. However, she was able to get comfortable from our conversations and each other opening

up that she asked a question that she was not comfortable to ask. Therefore, I showed her where

the toilet paper was.

After that night, we made a lot of progress in our relationship and we are comfortable to

continue our relationship and have fun moments with each other. This case study helped me to

understand social penetration theory better because we were able to become better friends by

opening up about ourselves. We were able to be vulnerable with each other. My roommate was

able to be open and that led me to be open with her. Observing a new relationship with my new

roommate helped me gain good insights about social penetration theory. I learned that when one

is willing to be open about themselves, then it helps the other person to be open and be

vulnerable. I also learned that opening up helps to create a long term friendship. My roommate

and I are better friends than when we were at the beginning of the semester. Our friendship

ultimately led me to be better friends with my other roommates and open up about myself to

them. I am very grateful for my friendship with my roommate and to the friendship that it has led

to and it all started with opening up about ourselves. This case study worked well as an example

of social penetration theory. However, there can be multiple person relationships that could not

be applied.
 Rodgers 7

In conclusion, social penetration theory, written by Irwin Altman and Dalmas A. Taylor,

is about relationships between two people and how it transforms into a more intimate and

personal relationship (Carpenter). One of the main points about this theory is the layers of an

onion. Social penetration theory is very useful for daily life and helps us learn about ourselves.

This theory also has multiple assumptions, specifically based on language, ethics, and human

nature. There is also a criticism about this theory only being about two person relationships and I

would have liked to read more about relationships and peeling back layers in a group setting.

Finally, a case study that I observed between me and my new roommate helped me understand

this theory better and how it helps the other person to be vulnerable before one is vulnerable.

Overall, social penetration theory is a very useful theory and gave me insights to my own life and

relationships.
 Rodgers 8

Works Cited

Altman, Irwin, and Dalmas A. Taylor. Social Penetration: the Development of Interpersonal
Relationships. Irvington Publishers, 1983.

Baack, Donald, et al. “The Personal Impact of Ethical Decisions: A Social Penetration
Theory.” Journal of Business Ethics, vol. 24, no. 1, 2000, pp. 39–49. JSTOR, JSTOR,
www.jstor.org/stable/25074265.

Carpenter, Amanda, and Kathryn Greene. "Social Penetration Theory." The International
Encyclopedia of Interpersonal Communication (2016).