SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY

Social Penetration Theory

At a party, one observes various levels of interpersonal communication. At an open table,
new acquaintances exchange names and share their musical preferences. A couple on their
second date chats about their political views. Long-time friends discuss their feelings about
a difficult family situation. Meanwhile, a married couple sits quietly, making only
occasional comments about the other guests and chuckling in agreement. Another couple,
stewing in anger, sits away from the other guests, refusing to speak to each other.
Social Penetration Theory explains these differences in communication in relation to the
depth of interpersonal relationships. Developed in 1973 by psychologists Irwin Altman and
Dalmas Taylor, the theory states that relationships begin and deepen through self-
disclosure. In the beginning, people establish relationships by disclosing many simple,
harmless facts through small talk. As relationships grow, the rate of self-disclosure slows
while the facts disclosed become increasingly intimate in nature. Intimate self-disclosure
allows others to penetrate a person’s public persona and discover his or her innermost self.
Relationships stagnate when the people involved refuse to self-disclose.

Theory
The Social Penetration Theory was originally created by Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor.
The theory deals with the ways in which relationships develop and progress. It explains
how communication enriches the relationship of two or more individuals. The theory states
that closeness (penetration) develops if communication begins at relatively shallow non-
intimate levels and moves in gradual and orderly fashion to deeper more personal levels.
The theory proposes that relationships get more intimate over time when people disclose
more information about themselves. The Onion Analogy is used to explain the Social
Penetration Theory.
Personality is like a multilayered onion, having the public self (height, weight, gender) on
the outer and the private self (values, self-concept, deep emotions) on the core.

Thoughts
Social penetration theory was developed to explain how information exchange functions
in the development and dissolution of interpersonal relationships. Social penetration
describes the process of bonding that moves a relationship from superficial to more
intimate (Altman & Taylor, 1973). Social penetration is specifically accomplished through
self‐disclosure, the purposeful process of revealing information about oneself (Derlega,
Metts, Petronio, & Margulis, 1993). Self‐disclosure increases intimacy in relationships to
a certain point. Social penetration can occur in different contexts including romantic
relationships (e.g., Taylor & Altman, 1975, 1987), friendships, social groups (for example,
religious groups or soccer clubs), and work relationships.
The theory has also been applied in computer‐mediated communication contexts such as
online dating and virtual teams.
Social penetration refers to the open interpersonal behaviors which take place through
social interaction and the subjective internal process which occurs before, during and after
the social exchange. It can be verbal, nonverbal or environmental. Verbal behavior
includes the exchanging of information while non-verbal behavior includes body
language (posture, facial expressions, eye gaze etc.). Environmental behaviors include
the personal distance between people and the use of physical objects and areas.
As one communicates with another, a series of behaviors occur internally which causes an
individual to create a subjective picture of what a person is like i.e.: how they feel about
the person both positive and negative etc. In effect when one communicates with another
either verbally, non-verbally or environmentally they are setting off a system of behaviors
that help us to create social bonds based on the “whole person” rather than individual
behaviors taken one at a time.
Social penetration is an orderly process which goes through different stages over time.
As interpersonal exchange gradually progresses from the superficial to the more intimate
our real selves are revealed, like peeling back the layers of an onion. The four stages to this
process are Orientation Stage, Exploratory Affective Stage, Affective Stage and Stable
Stage.
Orientation phase: When people first meet, they are revealing their outer superficial shell.
Conversations revolve around hobbies, likes, and dislikes.
Also known as the “small talk” or “first impression” stage. Communicators become
acquainted by observing mannerisms and personal dress and by exchanging non-intimate
information about themselves. Interaction adheres to social norms.
Exploratory Affective phase: The relationship develops as a few layers of the personality
are “peeled off” allowing the personality to show through in verbal and nonverbal
communication. The relationship becomes more intimate.
Communicators begin to reveal more about themselves, such as their opinions concerning
politics and sports teams. Deeply personal information is withheld. Casual friendships
develop at this stage, and most relationships stay at this level.
Affective phase: More layers are peeled away until almost the entire personality is
revealed. Participants develop and understanding for one another and begin to discuss
personal topics.
Communicators begin to disclose personal and private matters. Personal ways of speaking,
such as using idioms or unconventional language, is allowed to come through.
Communicators feel comfortable enough to argue or criticize each other. Romantic
relationships develop at this stage.
Stable phase: This is the final stage in the relationship where all layers have been peeled
away, exposing the core of the individual’s personality.
Communicators share a relationship in which disclosure is open and comfortable. They can
predict how the other person will react to certain types of information.
Depenetration: Occurs when one or both communicators perceive that the cost of self-
disclosure outweighs its benefits. Communicators withdraw from self-disclosure, thus
ending the relationship.
Progress through these stages is usually linear at first but may become cyclical later.
Psychologists say intimate relationships can switch stages at different times—moving, for
example, from the stable stage to the exploratory effective stage and back again—as
partners work through their insecurities and reservations.

Reward-Cost Assessment
Self-disclosure results in vulnerability, and becoming vulnerable to another person can
carry significant costs. Therefore, the extent to which a person chooses to self-disclose
depends upon the outcome of a reward-cost assessment. In a reward-cost assessment,
communicators weigh the risks of self-disclosure against its potential rewards. Sharing
personal information can strengthen relationships, increase physical and emotional
intimacy and open new lines of communication with a partner. However, if a partner were
to react badly to the information, betrayal, mistrust and separation could result. When
deciding whether to disclose personal information, communicators consider factors such
as trust, loss of privacy, the longevity of the relationship and previous reactions from
former partners in similar instances. As long as the rewards outweigh the costs, information
is shared.
Reward-cost assessments become more critical and frequent as relationships deepen and
the risks of self-disclosure rise. The assessments’ outcomes determine the volume and
types of information, if any, a person will share with a partner. When the costs of self-
disclosure exceed the potential rewards, self-disclosure stops and the relationship stalls.

Barriers to Self-Disclosure
Several factors can affect the amount of self-disclosure between partners: gender, race,
religion, personality, social status and ethnic background. For example, some cultures, like
the Japanese, value personal privacy more than others. Therefore, a Japanese person may
not self-disclose nearly as much or as enthusiastically as, say, a French person. Partners
who come from different religious backgrounds may hesitate to share thoughts or attitudes
that concern matters of faith. Men often refrain from expressing deep emotions out of fear
of social stigma. Such barriers can slow the rate of self-disclosure and even prevent
relationships from forming. In theory, the more dissimilar two people are, the more difficult
or unlikely self-disclosure becomes.

Applications
Social Penetration Theory is being used in today’s modern world to study electronic
interactions on the Internet through social media sites and chat rooms. On the one hand,
people who meet online are often unable to predict how a person will react to certain types
of information, making the cost of self-disclosure difficult to evaluate. On the other hand,
the impersonal nature of communicating through a screen may mitigate the cost of sharing
intimate information, thus making self-disclosure more likely. Theorists in this field have
observed a variety of outcomes with online interactions, highlighting a need for more study
to turn Social Penetration Theory into a more predictable model.

ASSESSMENT
Exercises 1.
1. Write down five terms that describe your personal self, and five terms that describe
your professional self. 30 points.
2. Think of someone you trust and who trusts you. How did you come to have a
mutually trusting relationship? Did it take effort on both people’s part? Discuss your
thoughts next meeting. 50 points.
3. Write down five terms that describe your personal self, and five terms that
describe your professional self. Compare your results with a classmate. 20 points.