VT #3 - 351
zahedpourtanin
TheoryCh8SLIDESSPTSETF20-1.pptxSocial Penetration Theory of Irwin Altman & Dalmas Taylor
8
A First Look at
Communication Theory
Em Griffin
Andrew Ledbetter Glenn Sparks
10th edition
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Social Penetration Theory
Personality Structure: A Multilayered Onion
Closeness Through Self-Disclosure
The Depth and Breadth of Self-Disclosure
Regulating Closeness on the Basis of Rewards and Cost
Ethical Reflection: Epicurus ’ Ethical Egoism
Dialectics and the Environment
Critique: Pulling Back From Social Penetration
Slide 2
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Social Penetration Theory
Social penetration – process of developing deeper intimacy with another person through mutual self-disclosure and other forms of vulnerability
Slide 3
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Ogres Are Like Onions!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-FtCTW2rVFM
Think about this conversation.
What does Shrek mean when he says this?
Why does he feel it’s important to communicate this to Donkey?
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Personality Structure: A Multilayered Onion
PS: Onion-like layers of beliefs and feelings about self, others, the world
Outer layer held in common with others
Beneath surface: Semiprivate attitudes revealed only to some
Inner core made of values, self-concept, unresolved conflicts, deeply felt emotions
Slide 5
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
PS- Deeper levels more vulnerable, more protected, and central to the self image.
5
Closeness Through Self-Disclosure
Self-disclosure: Voluntarily sharing personal history, preferences, attitudes, feelings, values, secrets, etc. with another person
Once wedge has penetrated deeply, it can return with little resistance
Permanent guard limits the closeness two people can achieve
Slide 6
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
It’s not self-disclosure if it’s not with another person. You can’t get closer to your cat or dog by disclosing information about yourself.
NONVERBAL ways for social penetration: Eye contact and “roughhousing” and smiling. But SELF DISCLOSURE is the main way
6
Figure 8-1: Penetration of Pete’s Personality Structure
Slide 7
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
The Depth and Breadth of Self-Disclosure: Depth
Depth of penetration – degree of disclosure in a specific area of an individual’s life
Depth of penetration determines degree of intimacy
Slide 8
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Applies equally to romantic relationships and FRIENDSHIPS
8
The Depth and Breadth of Self-Disclosure: Breadth
Breadth: Range of areas or topics covered
Casual relationship: Breadth without depth
True intimacy: High breadth; High depth
A lot of depth in multiple areas of one’s life
Slide 9
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
MIDDLE OF THESE : “Summer Romance (p. 96)”: High depth in one (or limited) areas
True intimacy has multiple wedges inserted deeply into every area
9
Four Observations: Depth and Breadth of Self-Disclosure
Peripheral items exchanged more frequently and sooner than private information
Self-disclosure is reciprocal, especially in early stages of relationships
Law of reciprocity: The process of self-disclosure is paced and orderly
Slide 10
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
10
Four Observations: Depth and Breadth of Self-Disclosure
Penetration is rapid at start but slows quickly as the tightly wrapped inner layers are reached
Depenetration is a gradual process of layer-by-layer withdrawal
Slide 11
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Social Exchange Theory
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Regulating Closeness on the Basis of Rewards and Cost
SPT draws heavily on “social exchange theory” (Thibaut & Kelley)
Social exchange – We evaluate perceived rewards and costs of relationships
Regulates behavior and relationship status
Slide 13
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
IN this episode of Friends, Phoebe is trying to decide between two guys. She discusses with her friends that she likes both, but then weighs the pros and cons of each to try to decide who to date exclusively.
13
Social Exchange
We Invest in relationships the way we invest in stocks: We want best return on investment
We do a cost-benefit analysis
Three parts to the analysis:
Relational Outcome
Relational Satisfaction
Relational Stability
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Instead of researching stocks, we decide if we enjoy interacting with someone, now and in the future,
14
Relational Outcome
Relational Outcome =
Perceived Rewards minus Costs of interpersonal interaction
Minimax principle of human behavior:
People seek to minimize costs and maximize benefits
Slide 15
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
The higher we rate a relational outcome, the more attractive we will find the behavior that might make it happen.
Early in relationships, we see physical appearance, similar backgrounds, and mutual agreement as “benefits” (birds of a feather flock together). BUT as the relationship CHANGES, what we consider a REWARD is different – WE can enjoy differences and diversity more.
15
Relational Outcome
If we see more benefit than cost in a relationship, we will start to reveal more about who we are.
If negatives outweigh positives, we will try to avoid conversation and contact as much as possible.
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Chandler gets a new roommate and at first he is cool. Chandler tries to get to know him. Later he realizes that he is crazy.
16
Comparison Level (CL): Gauging Relational Satisfaction
Comparison level (CL): Benchmarks used to gauge satisfaction with an interaction
Relational history establishes CLs for friendships, romance, family ties
Sequential interactions play a big part in evaluating relationships
Early “events” have a big impact b/c there’s not a lot to compare them to.
Slide 17
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
SATISFACTION: How happy or sad an interpersonal outcome makes a partner feel.
Official DEF Comparison level (CL):Threshold above which an interpersonal outcome seems attractive; a STANDARD for relational Satisfaction
Relational history: We judge the value of a relationship by comparing it to the baseline of past experiences. EX: if you are used to (PAST) romantic partners treating you really well, but your CURRENT partner does not, your Current partner becomes less attractive (as a relational partner) to you.
17
Comparison Level of Alternatives (CLalt)—Gauging Relational Stability
(CLalt) – Best outcome available in other relationships
Shows relative stability of relationships
Optimum situation: When both parties find that:
>
>
Outcome
CLalt
CL
Slide 18
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
This equation means that there is no other relationship more attractive AT THIS TIME, *BUT*
there ARE ALTERNATIVES available, so this person does not feel trapped (or like they are settling because they can’t do better)
18
CL vs. CLalt
CL is your overall standard for a specific type of relationship
Remains fairly stable over time
CLalt is your evaluation of other relational options at the moment
Your best available alternative
Other friends, romantic partners
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Why do people stay in unsatisfying Relationships?
A relationship can be very unsatisfying
Outcomes are below CL
BUT . . .
If a person can’t imagine or doesn’t have a better alternative, the relationship is stable
Outcomes are ABOVE their CLalt
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Ethical Reflection: Epicurus’ Ethical Egoism
Ethical egoism: Belief that people should live life to maximize their own pleasure and minimize their own pain
Most ethical and religious thinkers denounce it as morally repugnant
Slide 21
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Ethical Egoists believe we SHOLD act selfishly
Epicurus (Greek philosopher): The wise man should be prepared to lie to promote self interests, as long as he will not be caught. BUT since there is no way to know if we will be caught or not, it’s better not to lie
21
Dialectics and the Environment
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Dialectics and the Environment (Altman)
Dialectical model: People want both privacy and intimacy in their relationships
Experience tension between disclosure and withdrawal
Go through cycles of disclosure and withdrawal
Slide 23
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
TENSIONS AKA: “dialectical tensions”
23
Environment as a factor in Social Penetration
Social penetration relates to physical space too!
Light, location, temp. influences disclosure
Disclosing through environment (pics, music, etc.) can lead others to disclose verbally!
Research in dorms!
Major finding: “effective avoidance techniques” are important
Slide 24
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Territoriality: Claiming a location or object as our own
“effective avoidance techniques” - Important o find ways to have time alone in a dorm setting.
RESEARCH conducted at the University of UTAH by Altman
24
Critique of Social Penetration
It’s simplistic to equate self-disclosure with relational closeness (Petronio)
Others are uncomfortable with wholesale use of a reward-cost analysis
Doesn’t speak about transition from “me” to “we”
Slide 25
Copyright © 2019 McGraw-Hill Education. All rights reserved. No reproduction or distribution without the prior written consent of McGraw-Hill Education.
Petronio’s Communication Privacy Management Theory
25
