1. Social Penetration Theory: Facebook
Com 394 PPT Presentation by Ellie Hunt

2. Social Penetration Theory..
Principles of self-disclosure:
Risk
Trust
Reciprocity
Movement from impersonal to intimate information (Pennington, N 2015)
Factors associated with increased depth of relationships:
Time spent together
Commitment/satisfaction with relationship
Environment
Perceived costs and rewards of disclosure
(Altman and Taylor, 1973)
Developed by Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor (1973)
Theory attempts to understand the levels of self-disclosure that result in the development of interpersonal relationships (Altman and Taylor, 1973)
Self-disclosure: What you chose to reveal about yourself for others to examine and evaluate. (Olson, A )

3. 5 assumptions of Social Penetration Theory
1. Person A is aware they are building a relationship with Person B and vice versa
2. Physical proximity is required to develop and maintain interpersonal relationship
3. There are specific disclosures that correlate with each stage of relational closeness
4. Skipping ahead/going out of order of stages can stunt or end the relationship
5. The social penetration process is gradual
(Pennington, N. 2015)

4. Onion Metaphor for Social Penetration Theory
Breadth: Amount of differing topics disclosed
Depth: The extent to which each individual topic is disclosed 
(Altman and Taylor, 1973)
Four layers of disclosure
1st: Surface
2nd: Peripheral
3rd: Intermediate
4th: Central
(Pennington, N 2015)
Each internal level intensifies in depth and breadth as individuals share more information and spend more time with each other.

5. Facebook and the Four Stages of Self-Disclosure
Orientation Stage:
Surface layer: appearance, gender, age
On Facebook: Assume that once you befriend someone on Facebook you have accomplished this stage
Exploratory Stage:
Peripheral Layer: asking questions to learn each other’s basic interests, where they are from etc.
On Facebook: Scanning Facebook profile to learn this information
Intermediate Layer: discussing how you feel about things
On Facebook: Chatting on Facebook to learn this information
Affective Exchange Stage:
Entering the Central Layer: discussing personal information, small amount of breadth and depth
On Facebook: Can occur through in depth conversation chatting online or deciding to meet in person
Stable-Exchange Stage:
Reaching the core of Central Layer: full depth and breadth of each other’s personal information achieved
On Facebook: In most cases individuals who have reached this level will have met in person, excluding situations in which the relationship remains exclusively online (can be the case for long distance friendships or in the case of one of the parties masking their true identity) (Pennington, N. 2015)

6. Facebook: Chugging Rather Than Sipping
Facebook provides a timeline for it’s users that extends as far back as the day they created their account.
Whenever you accept a friend request, you’re granting someone access to review all of your previous status updates, pictures, and other information that has accumulated over the years on the Facebook wall.
This accessibility of information on Facebook allows individuals to “chug” information about new friends rather than learning about them in small “sips” of knowledge over time.
Social Penetration Theory becomes warped as stages of self-disclosure may be skipped.
Individuals are less able to self-disclose information gradually at their own discretion.
(Pennington, N. 2015, pg. 24)

7. Social Information Seeking
Refers to the process of meeting someone offline and using Facebook to learn about them
Also commonly referred to as “creeping”
By using this method to gain information about an individual, they are no longer in control of deciding how and when their self-disclosures are revealed.
“Unlike peeling away the layers of an onion.. Facebook allows one to slice right into a target’s personality and social history, thus more deeply accessing the feature’s close to one’s core” (Pennington, N. 2015, pg. 57)
The “chug” vs. “sip” metaphor and the concept of social information seeking demonstrate how much faster disclosures occur when Facebook is involved.

8. Context Collapse
“The flattening out of multiple distinct audiences in one’s social network”
Context collapse becomes harmful for self-disclosures on Facebook when the individual wrongly perceives their audience
The individual may not consider who their entire audience is and therefore disclose personal information too openly.
This can have a dramatic effect on halting relationships before they begin in the case that an individual in the audience is uncomfortable or turned off by what is disclosed.
Especially harmful if the individual does not have their settings on private and those who have yet to reach their surface layer of self-disclosure reject them.
(Pennington, N. 2015, pg. 16)

9. Example: Context Collapse in Conjunction With SPT
Surface Layer:
You receive a friend request from someone you have met a few times briefly and notice you have mutual friends so you accept
Peripheral Layer:
You notice they recently shared a music video posted by your favorite band
Next, they post a status clearly directed at an ex-relationship of theirs, calling them out for a long list of detailed events that occurred in their past.
Their status self-disclosed more information about their personal life then you feel comfortable with knowing because they most likely were not thinking about you as their audience when they chose to post it.
You may now feel less inclined or no longer care to further the friendship through the remaining layers of the social penetration theory
(Pennington, N. 2015, pg. 16)

10. Amanda M. Olsen’s Study on Facebook and The Social Penetration Theory
In her study of The Social Penetration Theory in regards to Facebook and increasing self-esteem, Olsen tests her hypothesized relationships between those who use Facebook to build relationships through self-disclosure and their related levels of positive self- esteem.
81% of participants reported that they felt good or very good when they self- disclosed through Facebook
(Olsen, A. M. 2013)

11. Amanda M. Olsen’s Study on Facebook and The Social Penetration Theory Continued..
Comforted by the Internet
Individuals were able to eliminate in person self-consciousness when self- disclosing information on Facebook.
“Online conversations allow time for an individual to think clearly about a response before replying.”
Online interactions through Facebook are usually done at home, allowing users to feel more comfortable and conversation to be more convenient.
(Olsen, A. M. 2013)

12. Amanda M. Olsen’s Study on Facebook and The Social Penetration Theory Continued
Self Esteem
According to the study, there is a positive correlation between self-esteem and self- disclosure on social media.
Those with low self esteem are more likely to self-disclose on Facebook because it is potentially less likely for them to be rejected.
“Facebook induced self-affirmation produces an array of related psychological benefits, such as being more open-minded, secure, willing to take responsibility for failure in a task, and less likely to blame others.”
Facebook users are more likely to share the positive highlights of their lives, causing their online presence to appear more exciting than the reality they live in.
(Olsen, A. M. 2013)

13. In Conclusion
The Social Penetration Theory illustrates the types and levels of self-disclosure that must occur in order to establish relational closeness.
Facebook causes difficulty when attempting to properly apply this theory to relationships because personal information is so readily available to see online.
In some cases, this causes individuals to make quick decisions about others and decide against truly getting to know them.
Self-disclosures on Facebook are closely related to levels of high self-esteem and some people feel more comfortable revealing self-disclosures through Facebook rather then in person.

14. References
Olson, A. M. (2013). Facebook and social penetration theory (Order No ). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. ( ). Retrieved from asu.edu/docvie w/ ?accountid=4485
Pennington, N. (2015). Building and maintaining relationships in the digital age: Using social penetration theory to explore communication through social networking sites (Order No ). Available from ProQuest Dissertations & Theses Global. ( ). Retrieved from asu.edu/docview/ ?accountid=4485
Taylor, D., & Altman, I. (1975). Self-Disclosure as a Function of Reward-Cost Outcomes. Sociometry, 38(1), doi: /