NOTE: Free essay sample provided on this page should be used for references or sample purposes only. The sample essay is available to anyone, so any direct quoting without mentioning the source will be considered plagiarism by schools, colleges and universities that use plagiarism detection software. To get a completely brand-new, plagiarism-free essay, please use our essay writing service.
One click instant price quote
Whether we realize it or not, theories are involved in our daily lives, usually more than once each day. These theories involve all subjects ranging form communication to the behavioral sciences. This paper, talks about my interactions this semester with my dyadic partner, Beth and how the Social Penetration Theory shows the development of our interpersonal relationship throughout the course of the semester. I had never met Beth before we were assigned to be dyadic partners for the semester. I had no previous information about her and actually had no idea who she was. Before I give my impressions of Beth, it was by chance that we were assigned to each other.
My original partner was absent on the day of the first interaction and the first thought that went through my head was, Why does my assigned partner always have to be absent? But fortunately on that day, another person was absent and I was assigned Beth. I think that our relationship started off well and deteriorated as the semester progressed. It did not deteriorate in a way that we hated each other, just that we are both different people.
My first impression of Beth was that she was a bright young lady. We talked about a variety of subjects during our first conversation and I found her to be extremely interesting. Beth and I are both from Long Island. She lives about five towns over from me, and we are both from middle class families.
This helped our interactions because we had a common ground and understood what we were talking about. Beth in a junior mass communications major and I am a Public Relations major. For the second and third interactions, Beth and I continued to get to know each other. She always seemed very open and willing to talk during our conversations, and did not mind taking the initiative. She usually made good eye contact and spoke very clearly. I think as the semester continued to progress, the development of our interpersonal relationship deteriorated a bit.
I do not think, as previously stated, that this has anything to do with Beth or myself. I just think that as our conversations went on, we just realized we were both different people. On a side note, Beth was absent for the last interaction and I had it with Amber, whose partner was also absent. I will now explain the Social Penetration Theory and show how this theory supports the development of Beth and mine interpersonal relationship.
I feel that this theory fits our relationship perfectly as will be shown. The Social Penetration Theory of Irwin Altman and Dallas Taylor is one of the theories we talked about earlier in the semester dealing with relationship development. It is important to remember while discussing this theory that it does not directly tell us how to maintain a relationship, but only how we naturally delve deeper into a relationship as we get to know someone better and gain trust. Altman and Taylor compare people to the layers that are in an onion. This is to represent our multi-layered personalities. The outer layer of the onion is like the outer layer of a person; it is visible to everyone.
This layer includes an array of details that can help describe who a person is. The outer layer can reveal a persons tastes, school major, world-views, dating status, etc. We then have the inner layers. The closer we get to the core of a person and the innermost layer, the more there is to know about the person. For instance, as we get to the second layer, we might learn about biographical data, and then delve deeper into their layer of more personal beliefs.
The core of ones personality is made up of their concept of self, values, unresolved conflicts, etc. This is extremely hard to reveal to other people and takes a lot of trust among them. A persons closest friend, parents or spouse might not know exactly what is at the inner core. There is also, according to the theory, a permanent guard that limits the closeness that people can actually have to each other. The Social Penetration Theory has two main ideas. These ideas are the concept of self-disclosure and the rewards / costs component.
Self-disclosure is when we reveal information, previously unknown to others, to that person. It is information that others would not normally know about us if we did not tell them. Early in a relationship we will first talk about surface information, then gradually, if we feel comfortable with each other, get to more personal information. Altman and Taylor suggest that in the beginning, self-disclosure is reciprocal. That is, if I tell you something, you will tell me something back in return. As we continue to teach and learn more and more about each other, the rate of self-disclosure slows down.
This is where the protection barrier of just how much we want to reveal about ourselves comes into play. The Social Penetration Theory also gives the following observations about self-disclosure. 1) Peripheral items are exchanged more frequently and sooner than private information. 2) Self-disclosure is reciprocal, especially in the early stages of relational development. 3) Penetration is rapid at the start, but slows down quickly as the tightly wrapped inner layers are reached. There is also the idea of penetration. This is a gradual process of layer-by-layer withdrawal. As a relationship deteriorates, people begin to close off areas of their lives that had previously been revealed. This is important because it gives us the opportunity to come and go with the information we reveal about ourselves.
The second concept of the Social Penetration Theory is the idea of a rewards / costs component. This part of the theory states that relationships will continue to develop if we look at them in terms of rewards and benefits. If the factors are positive or beneficial, we will continue the relationship. There are three ideas in this concept. 1) Outcome = Rewards-Costs: This part states that people seek to maximize their benefits and minimize their costs. We base our decisions too open-up to another person on the perceived benefit-minus-cost outcome. To sum it up, if we look at a relationship, and the rewards of keeping the relationship outweigh the costs, we will continue the relationship. 2) Satisfaction Comparison Level (CL): This states that we compare our relationships to other relationships and evaluate on what we already know.
If we are satisfied, then we will continue the relationship. 3) Stability Comp...
Free research essays on topics related to: beth, outer layer, interpersonal relationship, layer, penetration
Research essay sample on Outer Layer Interpersonal Relationship
