1
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
Social Penetration Theory
Shahla Orow
Oakland University
2
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
Social Penetration Theory
It is commonly believed that seeking an intimate relationship with another person can
either be frightening or enlightening. The social penetration theory explains the notion of
achieving relational closeness through the process of self-disclosure. The self-disclosure process
initially begins with a high level of social penetration of peripheral information. Increasing the
level of penetration to seek more intimate information as the relationship progresses is a way of
achieving a deeper level of relational closeness. There are many ways researchers try to explain
the notion of relational closeness in terms of social penetration. Research on Internet dating
provides support associated with advances from mediated communication to face-to-face
communication (Ellison, Gibbs & Heino, 2006). It is also stated that certain dimensions of selfdisclosure aid in the success of online dating. (Ellison, Gibbs & Heino). The development and
maintenance of friendships discusses changes in relationships from initial acquaintances to the
rating of friendship intensity (Hays, 1984). The breadth and depth of intimacy of interactions is
notably associated with the level of friendship intensity as well as the relationship development
(Hayes). Initial interactions according to Sabatelli, Buck & Dryer (1980) suggest that the level of
social penetration is mainly determined by facial cues and nonverbal expressions. Increasing the
level of social penetration as suggested by Harvey & Omarzu (1997) state that the minding
process ranges from behaviors that facilitate knowledge of others to maintain the penetration
process over time. Behavioral aspects regarding the notion of loneliness in men and women is
associated with the depth of self-disclosure as well as network density (Berg & Mcquinn, 1989).
The influence of ethical and sexual differences between blacks and whites is also associated with
the depth of social penetration in close relationships (Hammer & Gudykunst, 1987). Caughlin
(2010) uses a multiple goals theories approach to help provide better perspectives on how to
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
3
produce more efficient relationships. It is evident that there have been many attempts to explain
the notion of achieving a mutual level of relational closeness through the process of selfdisclosure. The key concepts of the research findings correlate with one another to help
understand the social penetration process.
Expectations and Standards for Long-Term Relationships
Online dating research has been resourceful when trying to determine whether online
dating behavior influences long-term or short-term goals. (Gibbs, Ellison & Heino, 2006). Online
dating allows more opportunities for individuals seeking to reach an intimate level of closeness
in interpersonal relationships. A primary reason individuals communicate according to the
uncertainty reduction theory, is to reduce the level of uncertainty about themselves as well as
others. The desire to reduce uncertainty increases the anticipation of future interactions from
online dating self-disclosures (Gibbs, Ellison & Heino, 2006). The social penetration process
implemented during the use of online dating sites helps contribute to the notion of trying to
reduce uncertainty. Gibbs, Ellison & Heino (2006) believe that there are four dimensions of selfdisclosure that aid in the success of online dating. The dimensions that contribute to this notion
include honesty, amount, intent and valence. Individuals with long-term goals who perceive
themselves as honest people are more likely to portray an honest online profile (Gibbs, Ellison &
Heino, 2006). The expectations of being honest in their profiles may help eliminate unsuccessful
future interactions. Anticipation of future interactions between individuals who are
communicating online increases the amount of intimate self-disclosure (Gibbs, Ellison & Heino,
2006). The more intimate information being disclosed between individuals allows them to
evaluate whether or not the relationship will be beneficial or not (Gibbs, Ellison & Heino, 2006).
The next dimension that Gibbs, Ellison & Heino (2006) discuss is the notion of intent. The use of
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
4
photographs, videos, and other types of multimedia that individuals intentionally disclose are key
factors contributing to their potential long-term goals. The last dimension that contributes to the
success of self-disclosure is positive or negative valence. The information disclosed about
individuals can be perceived as either positive or negative. The outcome of Gibbs, Ellison &
Heino’s (2006) research was mostly positive valence depending on the importance of long-term
relational goals. The more important the goals are, the more positive the online self-disclosure
process will be. Many surveys were conducted to prove the significance of these dimensions and
in result; most of their findings were accurate. Increased self-disclosure in relation to the social
penetration theory ultimately provides success in achieving relational closeness through online
dating (Gibbs, Ellison & Heino, 2006).
Developing and maintaining friendships often require effort from all parties involved.
Initial interactions between individuals can form impressions that can either lead to long or shortlasting friendships, or more intimate relationships. According to Hays (1984), the social
penetration theory is a systematic approach for developing and maintaining interpersonal
relationships. Many researchers find that the depth, or level of self-disclosure is the main factor
for achieving relational closeness in intimate relationships (Hays, 1984). Hays (1984) tries to
focus on what determining factors contribute to long-lasting friendships. Companionship,
consideration, self-disclosure, and affection were the main friendship behaviors that he assessed.
The results of relational development supported the notion of friendship intensity in correlation
to the social penetration theory. The factors contributing to long-term friendships are interrelated
to the factors of social penetration such as breadth and depth of self-disclosure. The more
friendship relationships progressed, the more intimate they became; which essentially leads to
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
5
the significance of achieving relational closeness described in the social penetration theory
(Hays, 1984).
Encouragement for Self-Disclosure
Minding is commonly described as a skill set for relationships that is used to filter
information. The two main minding skills proposed by Harvey & Omarzu (1997) are observing
and listening. Mastering these skills in order to achieve a level of self-disclosure helps facilitate
interpersonal relationships (Harvey & Omarzu, 1997). The more mindful an individual becomes
in a relationship, the easier it becomes to implement new ideas in a manner that pleases both
parties. The use of nonverbal communications cues such as facial expressions also helps
facilitate interpersonal relationships. The appropriate use of nonverbal expressions can aid in the
social penetration process (Sabatelli, Buck & Dryer, 1980). The ability to filter specific
expressions due to nonverbal sensitivity increases the likelihood of achieving a desired level of
social penetration (Sabatelli, Buck & Dryer, 1980). According to Sabatelli, Buck & Dryer
(1980), the sensitivity between individuals in an interpersonal relationship depends mainly on the
amount of time they spend together and whether or not they use that time in a meaningful
manner. Minding heightens the notion of information sharing during an interpersonal interaction
(Harvey & Omarzu, 1997). Individuals seeking intimate relationships who practice the minding
process are more likely to have a strong sense of togetherness (Harvey & Omarzu, 1997). The
same idea is applied when individuals acknowledge the differences between general sensitivity
and nonverbal sensitivity (Sabatelli, Buck & Dryer, 1980). Sabatelli, Buck & Dryer’s (1980)
research involving the penetration process based on encoding and decoding nonverbal cues
suggest that nonverbal expressions between partners correlate to the willingness to maintain a
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
6
long-term relationship. The encouragement of integrating cognitive skills with nonverbal cues of
communication helps to achieve a high level of self-disclosure.
Difficulties in the Self-Disclosure Process & Possible Solutions
Societal influences on race and ethnicity can contribute to a low level of self-disclosure
between individuals (Hammer & Gudykunst, 1987). Research conducted by Hammer &
Gudykunst (1987) was based on the influence of ethnical and sexual differences between blacks
and whites. Differences such as topics of discussions during interactions, different uses of verbal
language, and the use of nonverbal communication can result in a decline in the social
penetration process. A similar contributing factor to a decline in self-disclosure is the notion of
loneliness. Due to low levels of societal interactions between individuals (Berg & Mcquinn,
1989), it is unlikely for an individual to show an interest to maintain some level of relational
closeness. According to Berg & Mcquinn (1989), lack of self-disclosure and network density in
both men and women are associated with the concept of loneliness. Men who have a larger
support network are less likely to become lonely and more likely to engage in some level of
social penetration. Another contributing factor due to a lack of self-disclosure can be caused by
the different kinds of support groups in an individual’s everyday environment. People who are
surrounded by poor support groups often results in a negative impact on their physical and
psychological well-being (Berg & Mcquinn, 1989). Individual’s who take action to implement
positive changes in their environment, are likely to make a positive change to help increase their
level of self-disclosure in interpersonal relationships.
A multiple goals of theories approach taken by Caughlin (2010), emphasizes on how
individuals can produce more efficient relationships. A way Caughlin (2010) tries to achieve
relational closeness is by integrating all the basic principles of basic communication strategies.
7
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
His main focus is to achieve relational satisfaction. Understanding the differences between what
happens in a particular conversation as opposed to understanding what happens in relationships
is a key concept to conceptualizing the multiple goals approach (Caughlin, 2010). Research that
was conducted to support this theory involved illustrating the concept of particular concepts and
specific conditions in which people interact. Message strategies such as the way messages are
produced and perceived made it easier to achieve relational satisfaction. There are many key
components contributing to the notion of achieving a level of self-disclosure in order to achieve
relational closeness. Although there are many different routes to achieve a personal level of
relational satisfaction, the disclosure of any intimate information essentially depends on whether
or not the benefits outweigh the costs.
My Thoughts
I enjoyed researching the social penetration theory. The resources I found I felt were very
relatable to everyday instances. I also agree with the visual metaphor of the onion that Griffin
discussed in our textbook. Self-disclosure does start of at a peripheral stage. Initial interactions
with people are always either going to be enlightening or frightening depending on the first
impressions that were assessed by one another’s verbal and nonverbal actions. The notion I
touched base on about facial cues and minding I feel are the major contributing factors that are
the start of either long-term or short-term interpersonal reactions. I enjoyed learning about
different ways people think about interactions between themselves and others. Self-disclosure is
reciprocal, especially in initial interactions. When you enjoy the company of others, according to
the onion metaphor, you are more likely to engage in a deeper level of penetration. Overall, I feel
like this theory touched base on interesting points about the way people interact with one
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
8
another. It’s also interesting to learn about what initial encounters people are usually engaging in
and whether or not the outcome will be positive or negative.
9
SOCIAL PENETRATION THEORY
References
Berg, J., & Mcquinn, R. (1989). Loneliness and aspects of social networks. Journal Social and
Personal Relationships, 6, 359-372.
Caughlin, J. (2010). A multiple goals theory of personal relationships: Conceptual integration
and program overview. Journal of Social and Personal Relationships, 27, 824-848.
Gibbs, J., Ellison, N., & Heino, R. (2006). Self-Penetration of online personals: The role of
anticipated future interaction, self-disclosure, and perceived success in internet dating.
Communication Research, 33, 152-177.
Hammer, M., & Gudykunst, W. (1987). The influence of ethnicity & sex on social penetration in
close relationships. Journal of Black Studies, 17, 418-437.
Harvey, J., & Omarzu, J. (1997). Minding the close relationship. Personality and Social
Psychology Review, 1, 225-241.
Hays, R. (1984). The development and maintenance of friendship. Journal of Social and
Personal Relationships, 1, 76-98.
Sabatelli, R., Buck, R., & Dryer, A. (1980). Communication via facial cues in intimate dyads.
Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 6, 242-247.