Social Penetration Theory Critique
of Irwin Altman & Dalmas Taylor
By: Shane Paris
The Social Penetration Theory of Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor was developed
to explain the process of attaining relational closeness between individuals in a relationship.
In their theory they compared people to an onion. Their theory stated that like an onion a persons
personality is comprised of many layers; and within each progressive layer there lies a higher degree
of intimacy.
Altman and Taylor's Social Penetration Theory like many other theories is not flawless in some
aspects of its research. To help analyze and critique the Social Penetration Theory for validity I will
use the Scientific Theory approach. The Scientific Theory approach analyzes a theory based on five criteria.
These are Explanation of Data, Prediction of Future, Relative Simplicity, Testable Hypotheses, and a Practical
Utility.
Explanation of Data
The Social Penetration Theory does an adequate job of informing us about the goals the theory
wishes to accomplish. Altman and Taylor wanted to dissect the proess in which individuals develop relational closeness.
They accomplished this through conducting research studies. For example in a 1968 study Taylor conducted a 13-week
study of the interactions that took place between college roomates. In this study Taylor was able to confirm some of his
hypotheses and gain credibility for his theory.
Prediction of Future
A good theory provides for the ability to predict what will happen in the future. The Social Penetration
Theory has some deficiencies in this department. First the theory originally made no reference as to whether the theory
applied to both males and females alike. However further research has shown us that males are less open than females and this
could result in unpredictable results. Also the theory describes the depenetration process as occuring gradually layer by layer.
However research has shown that this is not the case. In a study of individuals that were romantically involved it was shown that
depenetration is a more chaotic process that occurs fairly quickly. In addition an increase in the level of self-disclosure can be
expected. With exception to these flaws the Social Penetration Theory has proved to be a helpful model in explaining the development
of relationships.
Relative Simplicity
Some will argue that in order for a theory to be good it must be complex. However this is not the case. The Social
Penetration Theory is a simple theory because it states a clear and concise goal of examining the relational closeness that is developed
between two individuals. It also clearly states the outcomes that have been reached from conducting research into this theory.
Testable Hypotheses
A scientific theory is essentially only as good as the hypotheses that support it. In Social Penetration Theory there are
a number of hypotheses that have been created and validated through research studies.
As well, in Social Penetration there are a few hypotheses that after further examination have been proven to be
invalid. One such hypothesis was the depenetration process which suggest that the deterioration of a relationship ocurs gradually from layer to layer.
However current research suggest that this is a chaotic process that occurs with great speed.
Practical Utility
What good is a theory if there is no practical use for it in the real world? Well the Social Penetration Theory is great in that it is a
theory all individuals can relate to. Everyone who interacts with individuals can use this theory to help them analyze situations. I would have to say that this
is the most beneficial theory I have studied so far. There are numerous situations in which this theory can be applied no matter the degree of complexity.
Social Penetration is the process by which individuals develop relational closeness. In
helping explain this process Charles Berger's Uncertainty Reduction Theory can help explain the interactions that
go on between individuals. To view an application of
Uncertainty Reduction Theory click here.
Back to Social Penetration Home Page
This page was last updated by Shane Paris on March 14, 2000