Social Penetration Theory and Self-Disclosure

Social Penetration Theory

Social Penetration Theory provides an insightful framework for understanding how interpersonal relationships deepen and develop over time through various levels and layers of personal information exchange. Psychologists Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor formulated Social Penetration Theory (SPT)  in the early 1970s. It was born from their interest in analyzing how relational intimacy grows.

They posited that as relationships develop, interpersonal communication moves from relatively shallow, non-intimate levels to deeper, more personal ones. The theory initially drew from various disciplines, including psychology and sociology, to explain the dynamics of relationship development.

Unlike interpretive theories, which rely solely on conclusions based on the individual experiences of their subjects, SPT is considered an objective theory, derived from data collected from real experiments.

The core concepts of the theory revolve around the onion model, an analogy used by Altman and Taylor to describe how personalities are structured in layered fashion. They viewed personality as a multi-layered onion with public self on the outer layers and private self at the core.

Each layer represents different facets of personal information. The breadth of penetration signifies the range of topics individuals are willing to discuss, while the depth refers to how personal and significant those topics are.

As relationships progress, layers are peeled away, revealing more private and sensitive information. Therefore, the onion model is a fundamental aspect, illustrating the gradual process of disclosure that leads to increased intimacy and relationship development.

The Stages of Social Penetration

Relationship development is not automatic; rather, it comes as a result of partners’ abilities to unveil or disclose their attitudes first, followed by their personalities, inner character, and authentic selves, with reciprocity. Proper self-disclosure is the primary catalyst in the formation of relationships. Altman and Taylor propose four major stages in social penetration.

SPT employs the onion analogy, which depicts self-disclosure as a process of shedding layers. The layers of the onion represent different layers of personality. It is commonly referred to as the “onion theory” of personality.

Orientation Stage

In the Orientation Stage, individuals engage in safe, cliché conversations with limited personal disclosure. The interactions are characterized by public behaviors and adherence to social norms to avoid controversy or deep engagement. Here, the largest amount, but least intimate of information is given.

Exploratory Affective Stage

Moving to the Exploratory Affective Stage, exchanges become more spontaneous, revealing personal attitudes and opinions. This stage includes more casual yet meaningful conversations, where people start to express personal beliefs and feelings indirectly. Many relationships do not progress beyond this stage.

Affective Stage

The Affective Stage sees the emergence of private and personal communication. There is some level of commitment at this stage. Personal idioms, or words and phrases that convey distinct meanings between individuals, are employed in talks.

Conversations in this stage involve personal or contentious matters, where criticism and arguments are more likely to occur, reflecting a deeper level of trust and emotional connection. Relationships become more valuable, meaningful, and long-lasting for both parties.

Stable Stage

Finally, the Stable Stage marks a plateau of emotional depth and intimacy. In this phase, partners have established a personal system of communication with predictable patterns, deep trust, and a comprehensive understanding of each other’s personalities and lives. In this stage, the least, but most intimate information is given.


The theory also includes an optional De-penetration stage, in which when the relationship begins to deteriorate and costs exceed benefits, a withdrawal of disclosure occurs, resulting in the relationship’s termination.

De-penetration is a slow progressive process of layer-by-layer disengagement that causes relationship and intimacy levels to decline and fade. According to Altman and Taylor, when de-penetration happens, “interpersonal exchange should proceed backwards from more to less intimate areas, decrease in breadth or volume, and, as a result, the total cumulative wedge of exchange should shrink”.

A warm connection between two people will erode if they start closing off portions of their lives that had previously been open. Relationships are more likely to end in a gradual loss of pleasure and caring rather than an explosive argument.

Tolstedt and Stokes observe that during the de-penetration process, self-disclosure breadth decreases but self-disclosure depth increases. This is because conversations about the end of an intimate relationship include a wide range of judgments, feelings, and evaluations, particularly unfavorable ones.

Self-Disclosure in Interpersonal Communication

Self-disclosure is a core aspect of developing deep interpersonal connections. It acts as a vehicle through which individuals exchange personal information, thereby fostering intimacy and understanding in their relationships.

Self-disclosure in interpersonal communication is the process where one shares personal, private, or sensitive information about oneself with another. This voluntary act is instrumental in the development and sustenance of relationships, as it facilitates a deeper connection and trust between individuals.

The information shared can range from thoughts and feelings to aspirations and fears. Social Penetration Theory posits that relationships develop through the gradual process of revealing the inner self, layer by layer, akin to peeling an onion. It is through self-disclosure that individuals allow others to see their vulnerabilities, thereby increasing intimacy.


Disclosure reciprocity is an essential component in SPT. If self-disclosure is not reciprocated in an interpersonal relationship, the relationship may reach a stage of de-penetration.

The norm of reciprocity is a social expectation that posits that individuals should match the level of personal information divulged by others with similar disclosures of their own. This reciprocal action helps maintain balance in the relationship, encouraging a proportional give-and-take in the sharing of personal information. Inadequate or excessive reciprocity can lead to issues in the relationship.

If one person shares significantly more than the other, it may cause discomfort or a sense of imbalance, potentially impeding the relationship’s growth. Conversely, if both parties adhere closely to this norm, they cultivate a space where open, authentic communication flourishes, strengthening their bond.

Depth and Breadth

Depth of penetration refers to the degree of intimacy in the topics being shared between individuals. As relational closeness increases, people share information that is more significant to their personal self, which can include their fears, hopes, and values.

Conversely, the breadth of penetration encompasses the range of areas in a person’s life where information is shared. Early stages of relationship development typically involve a wider breadth of topics, but these tend to be more superficial.

  • Depth: Progressing from shallow to more intimate topics.
  • Breadth: Spanning a variety of topics across different areas of one’s life.

Uncertainty Reduction

The uncertainty reduction theory (URT) describes the process that people go through while starting a new relationship. When two strangers meet, they interact by asking each other questions in order to strengthen their friendship. In both URT and SPT, questions are viewed as a technique for learning more about the other in order to get rewards. These incentives are either physical/material or abstract, and they replenish the connection as it grows.

The process of asking questions in a new relationship can minimize ambiguity and anxiety, resulting in a more established relationship between the two people. Whereas social penetration theory proposes that new connections (whether romantic or platonic) gradually evolve into deeper conversations and interactions, uncertainty reduction theory proposes that these new relationships can reach that deep level through question and answer sessions.


Gender, ethnicity, religion, personality, socioeconomic class, and ethnic background can all have an impact on how much self-disclosure partners share. For example, American friends tend to discuss private things with one another, whereas Japanese friends are more inclined to discuss superficial topics.

If disclosing personal information would go against their religious convictions, they may be less likely to do so. Being a member of a religious minority might also affect how comfortable one feels exposing personal information.

In intimate partnerships, women are more inclined to disclose than males. Men frequently refrain from expressing strong feelings for fear of social stigma.

The rate of sexual satisfaction in partnerships has been shown to be directly related to effective communication between couples. Individuals in a relationship who are anxious find it difficult to disclose information about their sexuality and desires because of the perceived vulnerabilities involved. According to a study published in 2012, socially anxious people often blame prospective censure or scrutiny for any fears they have about exposing to their love relationships.

Relationship Development Dynamics

The exploration of relationship development within Social Penetration Theory hinges on understanding the progressive increase in trust and intimacy, as well as the rewards and costs involved in deepening interpersonal relationships.

Trust forms the cornerstone of relationship development, as it is through increasing degrees of personal disclosures that intimacy grows within interpersonal interactions. As individuals reveal more private thoughts and feelings, they advance through various stages of relational intimacy. One 2020 study, examining the impact of mutual information sharing and relationship empathy, found that deeper levels of disclosure facilitate stronger trust and connections between parties.

A key aspect of the theory is the rewards and costs analysis, which dictates that relationship development is also influenced by weighing the potential benefits (rewards) against potential negative aspects (costs). It’s posited that relationships are more likely to deepen when the rewards consistently outweigh the costs.

According to social exchange theory, humans subconsciously evaluate each relationship and encounter with another human on a reward-cost scale. If the interaction was satisfying, that individual or relationship is regarded favorably.

When there are positive interactions that result in accurate reward/cost assessments, the connection is more likely to be gratifying. If an interaction was unpleasant, the relationship will be analyzed in terms of costs vs incentives or benefits. People attempt to predict the outcome of an interaction before it occurs.

Social Penetration Theory in Various Relationship Types

In friendships and romantic relationships, individuals initiate with small talk and gradually share personal dreams, fears, and values. For instance, a romantic relationship may begin with sharing hobbies and escalate to divulging personal struggles or family issues.

A characteristic pattern is that, as trust builds, the exchanges become more profound and personal, allowing these relationships to develop into emotionally close bonds.

  • Initial stages: Interests and hobbies
  • Intermediate stages: Hopes, aspirations, concerns
  • Advanced stages: Deep fears, past traumas, intimate details, high level of intimacy

Business and professional relationships, such as those between coworkers or between a client and a service provider, also follow the stages of Social Penetration Theory but with boundaries suited to professional contexts. Interpersonal disclosure tends to be more controlled and often pertains to work-related experiences or mutually beneficial goals rather than personal life details.

  • Initial stages: Professional competencies, work roles
  • Intermediate stages: Work-related achievements, challenges
  • Advanced stages: Personal work philosophies, shared visions for career growth

Within these dynamics, trust and closeness can lead to stronger collaborative relationships, resulting in more effective teamwork and improved productivity. Whether with neighbours or coworkers, the gradual and reciprocal exchange of information is crucial for the development of meaningful interactions.

Psychotherapy Relationships

Patient self-disclosure has been a hot topic in therapy, particularly psychotherapy. Early research indicates that patients’ self-disclosure is positively associated to treatment outcomes. Freud is a pioneer in urging his patients to fully open up during psychotherapy.

Many early clinical innovations, such as laying on the couch and the therapist’s silence, were designed to create a situation, or atmosphere, in which patients may reveal their deepest selves and be free of anxieties that would otherwise prevent them from consciously suppressing emotions or memories.

Throughout psychotherapy, patients have to continually navigate the conflict between confessional relief and confessional shame. It has been demonstrated that the length of therapy and the intensity of the therapeutic alliance (the relationship between the patient and the therapist) are two key factors influencing self-disclosure in psychotherapy. As SPT suggests, the more time patients spend with their therapists, the broader range of issues discussed, and more themes are highlighted in depth.

Social Anxiety Disorder

In social anxiety disorder, people experience overwhelming fear in social settings and interactions. They have a tendency to strategically avoid social connections, making it difficult for them to disclose themselves to others and express their emotions.

Self-disclosure is essential for developing close connections in which individuals can obtain necessary social support. Close friendships and romantic connections are two main forms of social support, both of which have protective effects and play an important role in helping people with social phobia cope with anxiety.

Due to the significant effects of the anxiety disorder, it has been shown that late marriage or remaining single is common among people with social anxiety disorder. This is problematic since the inability to obtain necessary social supports from intimate ones further confines the social phobic in the loneliness and melancholy that they have been experiencing.

Impacts of Modern Technologies

With the advent of social networking, the principles of Social Penetration Theory have found new relevance. On platforms like Facebook and Twitter, users navigate the complexities of self-disclosure.

Studies have shown that this self-disclosure plays a crucial role in the development of online relationships, much as it does in face-to-face interactions. For instance, the application of SPT to social media behaviors can be observed with Facebook users, who can control their level and degree of self-disclosure by changing their privacy settings. People acquire breadth by blogging about their life and providing surface information. They create deep relationships with depth by sending private Facebook messages and creating closed groups.

Moreover, the internet has increased the speed and scale at which personal information is disseminated, leading to rapid progression through the stages of Social Penetration Theory. However, this progression is not always synonymous with genuine intimacy, as the quality of online interactions can vary widely.

Challenges and Criticisms

While SPT has been pivotal in understanding relational development, it has not been without its challenges and criticisms. Researchers have identified limitations in scope and questioned its applicability in the modern digital age.

SPT originally posited a linear progression of intimacy through self-disclosure, which some researchers find overly simplistic. For instance, the theory’s assumption that relationships consistently grow deeper with increased disclosure is contested, as self-disclosure may not always lead to greater intimacy, and its effects may vary across cultures.

The theory has also been criticized for its limited scope on nonverbal communication, an essential component in relational dynamics. Although the theory has been foundational in social psychology of groups, critics argue that it underemphasizes group dynamics and the complexities of nonlinear relationships.

In response to critiques, SPT scholars have sought to adapt to better align with contemporary social interactions. Research studies in the digital era suggest that the online environment has changed the way individuals self-disclose and build intimacy.

Critics note that online communications tend to escalate more rapidly and differ significantly from face-to-face interactions. The theory’s framework has thus been expanded to address these nuances, including the varying significance and types of self-disclosure in social media. Furthermore, recent adaptation efforts also examine how cultural differences influence the depth and breadth of penetration in relationships.

  1. Altman, I. & Taylor, D. (1973). Social penetration: The development of interpersonal relationships. New York: Holt. ISBN 9780030766350
  2. Attrill, Alison (2012). Sharing Only Parts of Me: Selective Categorical Self-Disclosure Across Internet Arenas. International Journal of Internet Science. 7: 55–77
  3. Ayres, Joe (1979). Uncertainty and Social Penetration Theory Expectations About Relationship Communication: A Comparative Test. The Western Journal of Speech Communication. 43 (3): 192–200. doi:10.1080/10570317909373968
  4. Ayres, Joe. (2009). Uncertainty and social penetration theory expectations about relationship communication: A comparative test. Western Journal of Speech Communication. 43. doi: 10.1080/10570317909373968
  5. Baack, Donald; Fogliasso, Christine; Harris, James (2000). The Personal Impact of Ethical Decisions: A Social Penetration Theory. Journal of Business Ethics. 24: 39–49. doi:10.1023/A:1006016113319
  6. Croucher, Stephen M.; Faulkner, Sandra L.; Oommen, Deepa; Long, Bridget (2010). Demographic and Religious Differences in the Dimensions of Self-Disclosure Among Hindus and Muslims in India. Journal of Intercultural Communication Research. 39: 29–48. doi: 10.1080/17475759.2010.520837
  7. Farber, Barry A. (2003). Patient Self-Disclosure: A Review of the Research. Journal of Clinical Psychology. 59 (5): 589–600. doi:10.1002/jclp.10161
  8. Horne, Rebecca M.; Johnson, Matthew D. (2018). Gender Role Attitudes, Relationship Efficacy, and Self-Disclosure in Intimate Relationship. The Journal of Social Psychology. 158 (1): 37–50. doi:10.1080/00224545.2017.1297288
  9. Jiang, L. Crystal; Bazarova, Natalya N.; Hancock, Jeffrey T. (2013). From Perception to Behavior: Disclosure Reciprocity and the Intensification of Intimacy in Computer-Mediated Communication. Communication Research. 40: 125–143. doi:10.1177/0093650211405313
  10. Mangus, S. M., Bock, D. E., Jones, E., & Folse, J. A. G. (2020). Examining the effects of mutual information sharing and relationship empathy: A social penetration theory perspective. Journal of Business Research, 109, 375-384.
  11. Montesi, Jennifer L.; Conner, Bradley T.; Gordon, Elizabeth A.; Fauber, Robert L.; Kim, Kevin H.; Heimberg, Richard G. (2012). On the Relationship Among Social Anxiety, Intimacy, Sexual Communication, and Sexual Satisfaction in Young Couples. Archives of Sexual Behavior. 42 (1): 81–91. doi:10.1007/s10508-012-9929-3
  12. Sparrevohn, Roslyn M.; Rapee, Ronald M. (2009). Self-disclosure, emotional expression and intimacy within romantic relationships of people with social phobia. Behaviour Research and Therapy. 47 (12): 1074–1078. doi:10.1016/j.brat.2009.07.016
  13. Tolstedt, Betsy E.; Stokes, Joseph P. (1984). Self-disclosure, intimacy and the de-penetration process. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology. 46: 84–90. doi:10.1037/0022-3514.46.1.84
  14. West, Richard L.; Turner, Lynn H. (2019). Introducing Communication Theory: Analysis and Application, Sixth Edition. New York, NY: McGraw-Hill Education ISBN 978-1-259-87032-3

Last Updated on April 29, 2024