I have found the immersion into communication theory to be quite interesting – nothing shows the interdisciplinary nature of communication more clearly than the vast array of fields from which we draw our theoretical constructs. I will share some of my favourite theories as we go along on this blog.
Here’s the first one, related to interpersonal communication –social penetration theory.
This theory posits that relationship development is akin to penetrating increasingly resistant personal psychosocial layers (depicted through onion metaphor) to achieve greater depth and breadth of intimacy. According to the theory, "social interaction is generally predicted to proceed only gradually and systematically from superficial to intimate topics" (Altman & Taylor, 1973, p. 29). So, outer layers of the “onion” (e.g. biographical data) are penetrated more easily/quickly than deeper layers (self-concept; deeply held fears/fantasies).
This process occurs through self-disclosure, is guided by the “law of reciprocity”, and is motivated by consideration of outcomes. According to the theorists, "people assess interpersonal rewards and costs, satisfaction and dissatisfaction, gained from interaction with others, and that the advancement of the relationship is heavily dependent on the amount and nature of the rewards and costs" (Altman & Taylor, 1973, p. 6). A reverse process of “depenetration” can occur, which is “a gradual process of layer-by-layer withdrawal” (Griffin, 2012, p.116).
The social penetration theory falls into the objective camp of communication theories because it is based on the assertion that self-disclosure (cause) will result in increased relational intimacy (effect). Use of language such as “law” of reciprocity is another clear indication of the deterministic bent of this theory.
Axioms of social penetration theory
The theory has four axioms related to the depth and breadth of self-disclosure.
1. Peripheral self-disclosure is the first step of the process, occurs relatively early in the relationship, and related information is exchanged more frequently and easily, compared to self-disclosure at the core of the “onion.” Peripheral self-disclosure deals with shallow conversation topics such as basic facts about the person (e.g. name; where they live; where they work; etc.). If the process of social penetration continues, the parties progress gradually to the sharing of more intimate subject matter, from personal preferences, to goals/aspirations, and ultimately to a revelation of “self” (Griffin, 2012, p. 115). As the theorists explain, "social interaction is generally predicted to proceed only gradually and systematically from superficial to intimate topics (e.g., one does not ordinarily discuss serious personal problems immediately after meeting a stranger and after exchanging only introductory biographical information)" (Altman & Taylor, 1973, p. 29).
2. Self-disclosure operates under a “law of reciprocity,” especially in the early stages of the relationship. The basic idea behind this axiom is that disclosing personal information to another causes them to also self-disclose.
3. Social penetration is fast at the start of the relationship then slows down as the parties get to the inner layers. This is understandable given that the issues addressed in the inner layers are much more private. The lesson here is that intimacy in relationships is not achieved overnight – it requires time, work and commitment.
4. “Depenetration” (the unraveling of a relationship) is a reversal of the penetration process and similarly, occurs gradually. If parties begin to close off their private lives to each other, the relationship will deteriorate. The lesson here is that the intimacy gains in a relationship can be lost, if the relationship is not properly maintained over time.
Altman and Taylor made a distinction between “depth of penetration” (exposure related to specific area of personality) and the “breadth of penetration,” which is the range of areas in which self-disclosure takes place. Using the onion metaphor, they note that "the breadth category hypothesis involves the insertion, over time, of more and more pins into the onion, each pin entering a broad category of personality as each person gradually unfolds more of himself to the other" (Altman & Taylor, 1973, p. 29). Healthy relationships must therefore deepen and expand into and over the areas of personality.
Some applications of social penetration theory
How true are these axioms? Here are a few personal examples:
I have seen the law of reciprocity play out especially in a small group that I belonged to at church. This group dealt with difficult subjects in peoples’ past. Over time, as the more courageous individuals shared their stories, it broke the ice, so to speak, and the result was increasing reciprocity from the others.
Axiom 3 is one that we see in many work places, in interaction with peers. When we start a new job, we quickly share a lot of peripheral information with our new workmates. As the outer layers of information were exhausted, sharing does not proceed to the inner layers, in most cases, with the exception of a few close friends. Altman later theorized that environment has an impact on social penetration (Griffin, 2012, p. 121) so I would think self-disclosure/social penetration is not as strong in work places as in other spaces such as homes or community clubs.
Now to a personal example of depenetration. Having lived abroad for many years, I find that it’s now difficult to connect with friends back in Africa when I go back for a visit. So much has happened in our lives that we haven’t been able to share with each other, weakening our relationship. Although we try to catch up, the conversation can be awkward. Altman and Taylor would say that our friendship has experienced depenentration.
Social penetration theory in computer mediated communication
Recent research into the theory has looked at its application on online contexts. For example, Tang and Wang (2012) examined self-disclosure among bloggers, using the social penetration theory. The online study compared self-disclosure online and in real life, using a sample of 1,027 Taiwanese bloggers. Tang and Wang (2012) explored the topics that bloggers self-disclosed about online and in the real-world; to whom they disclosed this information; and the depth and breadth of these disclosures, based on the wedge model proposed by theorists Altman and Taylor (see Griffin, 2012, p. 115.)
The researchers came up with some interesting findings. Generally, the bloggers self-disclosed on a wide range of issues in their online and real-life communication. Tang and Wang grouped this into nine topics: attitude, body, money, work, feelings, personal, interests, experiences and unclassified. Self-disclosure varied significantly depending on the target audience or recipient of that disclosure, namely face-to-face disclosure to best friends; face-to-face disclosure to parents; and online self-disclosure on their blogs.
In both the depth and breadth of self-disclosure, the researchers discovered that the bloggers self-disclosed the most in their face-to-face interaction with their best friends. This was followed by face-to-face self-disclosure to parents and self-disclosure online, in that order. The female bloggers self-disclosed more than the males in their face-to-face communication, but there was no significant difference between the genders related to the breadth and depth of online self-disclosure. Also, younger bloggers (below 20 years) showed greater breadth in their face-to-face self-disclosure, but there was no significant difference in the depth of their online self-disclosure, compared to other age groups.
The study results tell us the following:
1. In terms of the application of the social penetration theory in online and face-to-face communities, individuals are more likely to self-disclose (both in depth and breadth) in their face-to-face interaction than online. This makes sense within the context of the theory, which suggests that self-disclosure is a gradual process and so greater penetration would be expected in relationships with people whom the bloggers know well, or whom they have known for sometime.
2. Self-disclosure to best friends, has greater breadth and depth, than self-disclosure to parents.
(I guess this is not altogether surprising so I won't comment further on it!)
3. In their face-to-face/interpersonal relationships, women show greater self-disclosure than men.
4. Those who are younger tend to have greater width of self-disclosure in their interpersonal, face-to-face communication than those who are older. I am not sure that this is accounted for in the theory as proposed by Altman and Taylor; at least I haven't seen any references to this in my readings thus far. My own hypothesis as to why younger individuals self-disclose more -- the older guys have exhausted all topics in their many years of interaction with their friends!
The key take-away for me, from this “testing” of social penetration theory in today’s online environment, is that demographic factors have an influence on the social penetration theory/process in face-to-face interpersonal communication, but appear to be insignificant or neutralized in the online context.
I welcome thoughts and reflections from readers.
Divine Agodzo
References
Altman, I. & Taylor, D. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart, and Winston. Retrieved from http://www.questia.com.
Griffin, E. (2012). A first look at communication theory (8th ed.). New York, NY: McGraw-Hill.
Tang, J. and Wang, C. (2012). Self-disclosure among bloggers: Re-examination of social penetration theory. Cyberpsychology, behaviour, and social networking, 15 (5), 245-250.
No comments:
Post a Comment