1. Social Penetration Theory
Altman & Taylor
chapter 9, Em Griffin (4th ed.)

2. CLICKER QUESTION TRUE___A.___ FALSE__B.____
Social Penetration theory teaches that you can become intimate with people quickly if you tell them all your secrets soon after meeting them.
TRUE___A.___ FALSE__B.____

3. Social Penetration Theory
Explains how relational closeness develops;
Altman and Taylor compare people to onions;
The onion metaphor represents the multi-layered nature of personality;
The outer layer contains the public self that is viewable by anyone;
The inner layers progressively contain more and more about our attitudes, values, self-concept, unresolved conflicts and deeply felt emotions;

4. Closeness Through Self-Disclosure
By allowing others to penetrate beneath the surface, we can draw close to one another;
There are many routes to vulnerability or allowing the other in, but the main route to deep social penetration is through self-disclosure;

5. The Depth and Breadth of Self-Disclosure
The depth of penetration is the degree of intimacy;
The theory is not limited to romantic relationships, it is equally about friendship;
The process of developing intimacy:
peripheral items are exchanged more frequently and sooner than private information;
Self-disclosure is reciprocal; new acquaintances will reach roughly equal levels of openness;

6. The Depth and Breadth of Self-Disclosure
Penetration is rapid at the start but slows down quickly as the tightly wrapped inner layers are reached;
Instant intimacy is a myth;
Depenetration is a gradual process of layer-by-layer withdrawal;
-- relational retreat is a taking back of what has earlier been exchanged--a movie shown in reverse--a gradual cooling off;

7. The Breadth of Self-Disclosure
Breadth is equally important to depth;
Breadth refers to the range of topics;

8. Regulating Closeness on the Basis of Rewards and Costs
Cost benefit-analysis:
pluses and minuses or perceived benefits and costs of the relationship
Social Exchange Theory (Thibaut & Kelley)

9. Outcome: Rewards Minus Costs
Social exchange theory (Thibaut and Kelley) attempts to quantify the value of different outcomes for an individual;
A number represents the rewards minus the costs of a course of action;
Just imagine that the benefits of a relationship equal +14 and the costs (what you imagine to be costs) equal -6, the outcome equals +8 [14-6 = 8];

10. Outcome: Rewards Minus Costs
This idea of calculating the rewards and costs goes back to John Stuart Mill;
The principle is that people seek to maximize their rewards and minimize their costs;
So, the higher the relational outcome number, the more attractive that outcome;

11. Outcome: Rewards Minus Costs
Social exchange theorists assume that we can accurately guage the payoffs and that we can choose the action that gives the best results;
Bottom line:We base our decision to open up with another person on the perceived benefit-minus-cost outcome;
What we see as benefits and costs changes over time in a relationship;

12. Satisfaction--Comparison Level (CL)
A relational outcome number, say, +8 only has meaning when compared with other outcome values;
Social Exchange Theory offers 2 standards of comparison:
relative satisfaction: how happy or sad an interpersonal outcome makes a person--the comparison level;

13. Satisfaction--Comparison Level (CL)
[to repeat]Social Exchange Theory offers 2 standards of comparison:
relative satisfaction: how happy or sad an interpersonal outcome makes a person--the comparison level;
Satisfaction depends on expectation: if you expect a +8, the +6 is below (sad) the CL and +10 is above (happy);

14. CL
So, CL is the threshold, above it you are happy, below it you are disappointed;
Our CL is determined by past history--what we have experienced before and has influenced our expectations;
A second standard by which we evaluate the outcomes we receive, the comparison level of alternatives (Clalt);

15. CLalt
Clalt is anchored by the best payoffs available outside the current relationship;
Put another way, Clalt could be thought of as the worst outcome you will put up with and still stay in a relationship;
As more attractive alternatives exist outside the relationship or a current outcomes slides below the Clalt , relational instability increases;

16. CL and CLalt
Whether or not a person is willing to become vulnerable by self-disclosing depends on whether the outcomes in the current relationship are above or below the CL (expectations) and Clalt;
Ideally, Outcome > Clalt > CL

17. Critique What are some of the critiques or problems with the theory?
You list them, please (pp ).