Unlock document.
This document is partially blurred.
Unlock all pages and 1 million more documents.
Get Access
1
Chapter 10: Social Penetration Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
Chapter 10
Social Penetration Theory
Chapter Outline
I. Introduction
• To understand the relational closeness between two people, Irwin Altman and Dalmas
Taylor (1973) conceptualized Social Penetration Theory (SPT).
• Social penetration refers to a process of relationship bonding whereby individuals move
from superficial communication to more intimate communication.
o According to Altman and Taylor, intimacy involves more than physical intimacy
other dimensions of intimacy include intellectual and emotional, and the extent to
which a couple shares activities (West & Turner, 2017).
• The social penetration process necessarily includes verbal behaviors, nonverbal behaviors,
and environmentally oriented behaviors.
• Altman and Taylor (1973) believe that people’s relationships vary tremendously in their
social penetration.
o Relationships follow some particular trajectory, or pathway, to closeness.
o Relationships are somewhat organized and predictable in their development.
• Early discussions of SPT began during the 1960s and 1970s, an era when opening up and
talking candidly was highly valued as an important relational strategy.
• Communication researchers and practitioners acknowledged that cultures can vary
tremendously in their endorsement of openness as a relational skill.
II. Assumptions of Social Penetration Theory
• The following assumptions that guide SPT are explored:
o Relationships progress from nonintimate to intimate.
o Relational development is generally systematic and predictable.
o Relational development includes depenetration and dissolution.
o Self-disclosure is at the core of relationship development.
• Relational communication between people begins at a rather superficial level and moves
along a continuum to a more intimate level.
• Not all relationships fall into the extremes of nonintimate or intimate.
2
Chapter 10: Social Penetration Theory
• Relationships—like the communication process—are dynamic and ever changing, but even
dynamic relationships follow some acceptable standard and pattern of development.
• Relationships do fall apart, or depenetrate, and this depenetration can lead to relationship
dissolution.
o Just as communication allows a relationship to move forward toward intimacy,
communication could move a relationship back toward non-intimacy.
• If a relationship depenetrates, it does not mean that it will automatically dissolve or
terminate.
• At times, relationships experience transgressions, or the violation of relational rules,
practices, and expectations.
o Transgressions may seem unworkable and, at times, they are.
• Self-disclosure can be generally defined as the purposeful process of revealing information
about oneself to others.
o According to Altman and Taylor (1973), nonintimate relationships progress to
intimate relationships because of self-disclosure.
• Self-disclosure can be strategic or nonstrategic.
o Researchers have used the phrase “stranger-on-the-train (or plane or bus)
phenomenon” to refer to those times when people reveal information to complete
strangers in public places.
III. “Tearing up” the Relationship: The Onion Analogy
• In their discussion of SPT, Altman and Taylor incorporate an onionskin structure.
• The outer layer is an individual’s public image, or that which is available to the naked eye.
• Reciprocity is the return of openness from one person to another.
o Researchers have shown consistently that when one person divulges personal
information, the other person is likely to reciprocate similar levels of sensitive
o Breadth refers to the number of various topics discussed in the relationship.
o Breadth time pertains to the amount of time that relational partners spend
communicating with each other about these various topics.
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
o Trust is an inherent part of the disclosure and reciprocity processes.
o It is very difficult to disentangle the relationship between trust and self-disclosure as
the two are inextricably linked.
IV. A Social Exchange: Relational Costs and Rewards
• Social Penetration Theory is grounded in several principles from many theories related to
relationship development.
• Altman and Taylor based some of their work on social exchange processes; that is, an
exchange of resources between individuals in a relationship.
• Taylor and Altman (1987) argue that relationships can be conceptualized in terms of
rewards and costs.
o Rewards are those relational events or behaviors that stimulate satisfaction, pleasure,
and contentment in a relational partner, whereas costs are those relational events or
behaviors that stimulate negative feelings.
o If a relationship provides more rewards than costs, then individuals are more likely to
stay in that relationship.
o If an individual believes that there are more costs to being in a relationship, then
relationship dissolution is probable.
• A reward–cost ratio is the balance between positive and negative relationship
experiences.
o Rewards and costs have a greater impact early on in the relationship.
o Relationships with a reservoir of positive reward/cost experiences are better equipped
to handle conflict effectively.
V. Stages of the Social Penetration Process
• Social Penetration Theory is viewed as a “stage” theory (Carpenter and Greene, 2015).
• Relationship development occurs in a rather systematic manner, and decisions about
whether people want to remain in a relationship are not usually made quickly.
• Not all relationships go through this process, and those that do are not always romantic
relationships.
A. Orientation: Revealing Bit by Bit
• The earliest stage of interaction, called the orientation stage, occurs at the public level.
o During this stage, comments are usually on the cliché level and reflect superficial
aspects of individuals.
o Individuals smile pleasantly and react politely in the orientation stage.
4
Chapter 10: Social Penetration Theory
B. Exploratory Affective Exchange: The Self Emerges
• The exploratory affective exchange stage, however, is an expansion of the public
areas of the self and occurs when aspects of an individual’s personality begin to emerge.
• Both people begin to “explore” each other and small pieces of their private life becomes
more public.
o This stage is comparable to the relationships one has with casual acquaintances
and friendly neighbors.
C. Affective Exchange: Commitment and Comfortability
• This stage is characterized by close friendships and intimate partners.
• The affective exchange stage includes those interactions that are more “freewheeling
and casual” (Taylor & Altman, 1987, p. 259) in that communication is frequently
spontaneous and individuals make quick decisions, often with little regard for the
relationship as a whole.
o The stage includes those nuances of a relationship that make it unique.
• Personal idioms are private, intimate expressions stated in a relationship.
o This stage, like the exploratory affective exchange stage, may also include
criticisms.
o These criticisms, hostilities, and disapprovals may exist “without any thought of
threat to the relationship as a whole” (Altman & Taylor, 1973, p. 139).
D. Stable Exchange: Raw Honesty and Intimacy
• The fourth and final stage, stable exchange, pertains to an open expression of thoughts,
feelings, and behaviors that results in a high degree of spontaneity and relational
uniqueness.
o Partners are highly intimate and synchronized.
• Social Penetration theorists believe that there are relatively few misinterpretations in
communication meaning at this stage.
o The reason for this is simple: Both partners have had numerous opportunities to
clarify any previous ambiguities and have begun to establish their own personal
system of communication.
5
Chapter 10: Social Penetration Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
VI. Integration, Critique, and Closing
• Social Penetration Theory has been appealing since its inception over 40 years ago.
• The theory’s empirically derived conclusions have drawn the attention of researchers over
the years.
A. Scope
• Some scholars contend, for instance, that self-disclosure—one of the key themes of the
theory—may be too narrowly interpreted.
o Rachel Freeth (2012) believes that self-disclosure depends on a number of factors,
not simply the need to reveal to people over time.
o Altman explained that being open and disclosive should be viewed in conjunction
with being private and withdrawn (Altman, Vinsel, & Brown, 1981; Taylor &
Altman, 1987).
o C. Arthur VanLear (1991) underscored this thinking by concluding that there are
two competing cycles of openness and closedness in both friendships and
romantic relationships.
B. Heurism
• There can be no doubt that Social Penetration Theory and the concept of self-disclosure
has yielded literally thousands of studies.
o Therefore, SPT is highly heuristic.
Classroom Activities
1. A Metaphor for Communication in Relationships
6
Chapter 10: Social Penetration Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
Objective: To encourage students to develop an original metaphor that illustrates the
communication that occurs in various stages of relationships
Materials: Paper
Directions:
a. Ask students to review the onion metaphor proposed by Altman and Taylor in their
Social Penetration Theory.
b. Individually or in groups, instruct students to develop an original metaphor that
illustrates the communication that occurs in the following relationship stages: the
orientation stage, the exploratory affective exchange stage, the affective exchange
stage, and the stable exchange stage.
c. Encourage students to draw a picture of their metaphor and share it with the class.
2. The M&M/Skittles Game: Sharing Information
Objective: To demonstrate the ease or difficulty of sharing various types of information
Materials: A bag of M&Ms or Skittles large enough so that each student can have several
pieces, as well as a handmade chart assigning each candy color to a different type of
disclosure (Disclosures should range from impersonal to more personal.)
Examples: Red = Favorite movie
Brown = Ideal vacation destination
Yellow = Pet peeve
Green = Thing that would ultimately make me happiest
Blue = Thing I fear most
Directions:
a. Before revealing the color chart or the instructions for disclosure, pass around the
bag(s) of M&Ms or Skittles. Instruct students to take as many as they want, but be
sure to tell them that they must take at least one.
b. After all of the students have taken at least one candy, reveal the color/disclosure
chart.
c. In groups or as a class, instruct students to answer the question for each of their
candy pieces. If students took several pieces, they must answer several questions.
Students may answer the same question multiple times if they chose several candies
of the same color.
d. Lead a class discussion that focuses on these questions:
7
Chapter 10: Social Penetration Theory
West, Introducing Communication Theory, 6e
• How would you apply the concepts of breadth and depth of disclosure to the
information you shared in this exercise?
• Which types of information were easier to share with the group or class? Why?
Which were the most difficult? Why?
3. Analyzing Your Own Intimate Relationship
Objective: The objective is to encourage students to critically examine an intimate
relationship. Students may gain insight into the types of information exchanged during
various relationship stages: orientation, exploratory affective exchange, affective exchange,
and stable exchange.
Materials: None
Directions:
a. Ask students to recall a past or present intimate relationship. Be sure to emphasize
that “intimacy” does not necessarily have to be romantic in nature; it can be a
relationship with a very close friend or family member.
b. Instruct students to create a timeline illustrating the various stages (orientation,
exploratory affective exchange, affective exchange, and stable exchange) of the
relationship. On their timelines, students should include specific events or situations
that served as “markers” of the relationship moving from one stage to the next.
c. Have students identify a verbal or nonverbal behavior they performed or observed in
each of the stages.
