Social Penetration Theory and Social Exchange Theory

This paper is making a comparative analysis of Social Penetration Theory and Social Exchange Theory. In this approach the basic purpose is to see through the process of evaluation of these theoretic aspects in practical fields.

To a great extent the paper also tries to interpret these theories in global context and tries to derive some of the basic ingredients to manage with the international aspects of peace and security.Introduction Irwin Altman and Dalmas Taylor are the chief exponents of Social Penetration theory. The initiated this theory with the attempt to consider it to be the resource for the establishment of relational closeness in human social context. The connectivity determined for the persuasion of this closeness has been negotiated through the developmental structure and proceedings related to self-disclosure, added by the elements of gradual and systematic process of managing relations. This management structure develops from superficial status to the floor of intimate bonds. As stated by Altman and Taylor (1973) the formats of social penetration determine the levels of exchanging ideologies and thereby get processed through immediate scopes and forecasted outcomes.

On the other hand, the terms of managing Social Exchange theory deals with the aspects of social psychology where all kinds of sociological perspectives are generated for a better social change. The process is generated for long term and stable kind of social relations between diversified communities and parties within a society. The thread of negotiation has been considered to be a strong base for the persuasion of social exchange theory in pragmatic fields. From a wider canvas this theory looks forward for a very balanced bond between varied social contexts in human society. These are actually communicative theories that are developed and followed for providing the society with more stable relationship status.

As society depends on bonds and every bond is an integral part of negotiation in a conflicted society. The approaches are all meant for the purpose of creating adequate proximity among diversified relationships consisting within the society or human community. There is a global determination added to the proceedings related to these kinds of formulations. These theories initiate its formulations for the administration of social conflicts and thereby created room for mutual understanding. These are some of the common characteristic features that are considered seriously by the modern sociologists and political analysts.

The target is to attain more balanced persuasions of these theories for the promotion of international matters related to peace and security in general. In this paper the main motive is to provide a comparative analytical ground between Social Penetration Theory and Social Exchange Theory in this approach there is a static process of evaluating the entire comparative aspects. Different practical situations and real life instances are added to this process of evaluation. In dealing with the infrastructural settings of both Social Penetration Theory and Social Exchange Theory, the paper provides comprehensive illustrations in reference to current society. There are specialized modes of evaluating these theories.

In the process of evaluation specific importance has been led over the basic structure of these theories. However, to a great extent the initiations are managed for gaining relevant and dependable society in social contexts. This paper deals with all those ingredients that are related to the purpose of managing and restructuring the essence of proximity in society. The integrated proceedings led by these theories are further enhanced for the meeting the international demands of peace and security. The differences between these theories are evaluated in reference to the global aspects that can well synchronies the selected elements for the purpose of establishing the international grounds of peace and security. Social Penetration Theory Social Penetration Theory is a psychological theoretical approach.

Its applications are determined on the basis of that entire context that creates floor for developmental structures in terms of interpersonal relationships. Most of the instances related to the application of Social Penetration Theory are directly meant for the fields of communications from international perspectives to the global atmosphere. The elements of self-disclosure gets promoted under this theory and as such all those people who are involved in this communicative means get the chance to reveal more about themselves. It provides the chance to explore and manage with the acts of releasing and revealing more information about oneself. The application of Social Penetration Theory gets formulized on both conscious as well as unconscious state of mind.

In this reference Altman and Taylor (1987) came up with the ideological determinations of considering the thought that only through the means of opening up the opinions of one’s self in the route of social penetration, the essence of self-disclosure can be realized. These scholars further add that by way of being a vulnerable entity a person can develop a close relationship with another person. The persuasions and the elements that promote the essence of vulnerability can further express the varied proceedings in managing interpersonal relationships. This proceeding is very much integral to provision of giving anything that is identified as personal possession. These possessions can be exemplified through the instance of giving a dresser drawer to a particular partner. Altman and Taylor, declares social penetration theory as the mode through which communication gets enriched and the relationships among the individual representatives get identified.

There are varied kinds of formulations adopted by these scholars to explain the formulations undertaken social penetration theory. The most initial approach has been elaborated through the conceptual persuasion of ‘the Onion’. In this context, the authors compared the communicative representatives as ‘onion’. This is a metaphorical illustration that demonstrates the existence of multi-layered personalities. As the communications between these representatives are analyzed, it has been found that to discover an individual it s important to have stages of communications and interpretations. An individual actually has got multi-layered psychological existence.

In order to understand the individual to the core, the other person must get involved I his personal periphery and thereby need to analyze the instances of identifying the personality that lies within each of the layers. The realized succeeding layers get revealed in a very systematic way. it is the mode that gets initiated through basic information and leads to self disclosing realizations. In order to exemplify this instance we can look into the situation where there are many students are sitting in a classroom. There is a visible progress marked through quarter, leading to detailed information about their lives. The interactions related to their personal lives gives the faculty the opportunity to understand the psychological and the social considerations fixed within these students.

The role of the faculty in this act is very vital. He provides the students with the room to elaborate their thoughts and thereby to attain self assessed groundings. The expeditions related to the application of understanding individual like the ‘onion’ proceeds to the stage of formulation of ‘breadth and depth of self-disclosure’. This analytical device under social penetration deals with the peripheral exchange of understanding private information. In formulizing this peripheral exchange there is the scope to attain self-disclosure as a reciprocated entity. In this formulation the penetration is comparatively rapid and generates through frequent modes of understanding the inner layers of a personality.

The process of observations led through these proceedings adds the essence of depenetration through very gradual withdrawal (Griffin, 1997, pp.146-147). This theoretical aspect is very important as it manages all kinds of relationships for personal performances. Developments in terms of interpersonal relationships are thus generated through these modes. Association of ‘rewards and determination of cost-benefits’ are added to these developmental proceedings. Rewards are meant for those who can illustrate the original innocence and honesty to the process of penetration.

It is important to be impressive added by positive determination of the personality. An individual needs to be very true to the process of revelation. In a diversified mode there can be a situation where the other individual will realize the negative attributes in the person. The positive essences add rewards and recognition to the individual and that is where the cost of trust can be increased by the person. The entire determining activity for a decisive act of reward and cost gets established through personal characteristics of participants, outcomes of exchange and situational context. There is the level for determining the outcomes ion relation to the satisfaction collected from the participants.

Social penetration theory is a kind of infrastructural initiation that refers to an explicit interpersonal behavioral comprehensiveness. This is a theoretical expedition that is usually intended to meet the demands of the contemporary social interactive bases. This is a theoretical formulation that determines the adoption of distorted proceeding related to the inner motivational persuasion. The entire process depends over a continuous method of adopting exchange. It also escorts the individual grounds for obvious exchange of verbal, non-verbal and situational behaviors. As the individual gets into the modes of social penetration, he discovers the importance of emotional and substantive components utilized in the process.

Inclusion of verbal information exchanges is directly proportionate to the persuasion of gestures and body movements. As the speaker initiates to declare his thoughts, the listener starts analyzing his activities. It is thus very necessary to concentrate over the management of bodily movements and to have synchronized mode of communication. There is the need for a transparency in the speaker. As the process of communication gets established; it becomes mandatory to expose the interconnectivity between the people who are communicating. Social behaviors accompanied by subjective modes of declaring inner identity is a chief characteristic feature of social penetration theory.

The theory demands for a process of realizing individual through his activities and the modes of managing verbal as well as non-verbal communicative structures. Social Exchange Theory Social exchange theory is a universalized formulation that has got the capability to hypothesize he totality of human relationships. This theory considers the means of forming relationships, that too on the basis of wider scale of estimations. Utilization of subjective analysis over cost benefit context added by the comparative alternatives is the elemental means of its proceedings. This theory gets particularized in different social contexts and looks in the process of creating bonds in international grounds.

There is a deep rooted participation of different social categories in this theory. The categories that are dealt by this theory are related to the economic, political, psychological and above all the sociological considerations determined under a social context. All the approaches are developed and interrelated as per the demands f the social contexts. To a great extent these are the fields that are maintained for meeting the wider peripheries of establishing human relationships and determined conditions for integrating the same. Social exchange theory is a well defined theoretical formulation that gets tied to the basic instinctive and rational choices of human in general.

Persuasion of this theory is directly related to the synchronized process of adapting structuralism and flourishes with many kinds of assumptions. In reference to the contemporary aspects of dealing with sociology, it is noteworthy to mention that the sociological context under social psychology is considered as one of the most distinctive and very ambitious kind of persuasion (Stolte, Fine and Cook, 2001; pp. 387-413). According to the research initiated by Alexander (1990, pp. 339-345) and Cook (2000, pp. 685-692) the theoretical conceptualization of social exchange theory is an ambitious process and it can be attined through many flexible procedures.

In a state of retrospective persuasion, social exchange theory gets introduced to sociology by means of comprehensive illustrations determined by psychologically and economically determined features (Emerson 1962, pp. 31-41; Homans 1961). The participation of sociologists and social psychologists are thus indispensable for the determination of these respective features. Roles led by cultural anthropology through the initiations led by economic anthropologists are very important for the understanding f cultural and cross cultural demarcations. These are the modes that provide assistance in the process of understanding and dealings with human behavior. These comprehensive proceedings support the promotional aspects determined for achieving essence of a social exchange.

The scopes for arranging rewards and resources are the primary materials for characterizing the earnings of mutual contexts in a society. Coleman, (1990, p. 37) determines the process of social exchange theory as a means of supporting exchange transactions. It further supports the essence to permeate all sorts of social phenomena and infrastructural modulations. The proceedings are much enthusiastically promoted by means of participations of different groups and through intergroup relations.

The performances are conceived as determined sets. They are also considered as joint outcomes for the purpose of meeting voluntary individual actions. Inclusion of appraisals and rewards are integral to this theory and promotes the groundings for probable exchange of thoughts and negotiating circumstances (Blau, 1964, p.91). It is thus very appropriate to consider social exchange theory as the foundation and source for open secrets in any kind of group, community or social life.

The base for human relationships has been determined through the belief that social action is in itself is a mode of exchange. Under tangible and intangible situations, these actions are enhanced through exchangs and rewards and costs benefit activities. The entire formulation of managing exchange is a direct process of ‘give and take’. There are different instances when people in a society prefer to add changes to their foundations and basic cultural entities. In these approaches all the maters are scrutinized under social argumentations. The process of social exchange represents human behavior.

Homans elaborated that Social Exchange represents the basis of human behavior ad the activities performed by human (1961, p. 317). It is the human behavior that needs to get speculated well. Since the entire exchange program depend so much on human behavior, it becomes an obvious means to add sustainability to the process. In relation to economic transactions there are the ways that establishes the basic needs for configuring the social infrastructure (Coleman, 1990: 37-39).

In the words of Coleman (1986) these structural configurations can b declared as “configuration of interests and resources”. The implementation of the resources and the related level of resources are generated in pervasive manners within the social life. The process of exchange gets managed by the selected human behaviors and characteristic features in relation to the determined economic transactions. The purposive actors and marketing institution related to these exchanged dealings are interdependent over the programs that are adopted for the transactions. On a different mode the exchange transactions can be analyzed under the perspective of being reciprocal.

If the process of reciprocity is negated and does not get observed, these kinds of transactions tend to discontinue in long term persuasions. There is the need for steady involvement of participants and right kind of promotional understanding of the resources and the interests. In terms of comprehending this process through psychological analysis, the aspects of an exchange get defined as determined social interaction. This mode of interaction is enhanced and characterized by means of reciprocal stimuli marked within the participants. There is the participation of mutual reinforcements within the exchange relations. In the words of Emerson, the exchange relations gets understood “by definition reciprocal, and if this reciprocity is broken the relationship will extinguish over time.

Within the attribute of reciprocal reinforcement, the concept of an exchange relation contains an ‘exchange ratio’ [balance-imbalance]. This variable sets the stage for introducing dependence, power, and cohesion” (1969, pp. 387-389). Evaluation of Social Penetration Theory The conceptual descriptions related to the application of social penetration theory are determined for the purpose of attaining interpersonal realization in an individual. This theoretical aspect is very important in terms of comprehending the inner self of an individual.

It has been specifically declared that every individual is like an ‘onion’ that is to say, every individual possess multi-layered personality. To know a person well it is important to know the core content of his inner self. It is the mode through which one can discover a person and thereby can establish the necessary processes to deal with his problems or the problems created by him. The purpose of this theory is to generate transparency in a person and to make him aware of the hurdles that might come in his way, or might get created by him in social context. It is a journey that takes place from public self to the private self.

As declared by Griffin (1997, p. 145) to know a person well it is important to see through his inner entity. This will not only help in learning more about the person but also will provide the need for all those elements that are relevant to social context. The public self is the elaboration of a personality that is hardly clear to others, whereas the private is an exploration of one’s psychological and personal settings. It is the base developed for the purpose of modifies the personality according ot the determined norms of society. It is very important to evaluate the need for social penetration theory in practical fields.

There are much opposition led against this theory. Scholars like Jourard offered many points in reference to the relevance of this theory in the contemporary socio-cultural set up. According to statements offered by Jourard , “You cannot collaborate with another person toward some common end unless you know him. How can you know him, and he you, unless you have engaged in enough mutual disclosure of self to be able anticipate how he will react and what part he will play?” (1980, p. 3).

As declared by Journad, people in general are reluctant to reveal their inner intentions. They are much repulsive in making adequate declarations about their in depth point of views. The reluctance towards self-disclose is directly related to the dread for moral judgment. People usually fear that they might get misunderstood if not behaved as per the determined norms. This is a very strong socio-cultural format that makes people realize the importance of being what they actually are. It is the fear of being exposed as a bad man/woman in the society.

The basic idea is to stick to the role that the society expects to see in the person. The pressure of family, friends, social norms and legal structure of the society are the elements that offer hindrance to a person in evolving with the inner self. It the pressure of the mentioned elements that makes a person feel that he should avoid the theoretical structure of this kind. As a matter of fact, the scholar does not see any relevance towards pragmatic social set up. He further adds that a person can agree to self-disclose only when he can trust the listeners.

It is the factor of trust that must be maintained well. If here is any diverse situation than the society as a whole can face serious conflicts and misunderstandings. Conflicts will get common to every individual involved in self disclosed activities. Human relationships can thereby get terminated and innumerable instance might follow such conditions. In order to generate social penetration theory, it is necessary to go through the adoption of “explanation of data” by the participant.

It is on the basis for the behavior managed by the participant that the element of self-disclosure added by the level of closeness can be assessed in social context. However a persuasion of human behavior can be different from the one that he actually is, and thus needs to undergo proper psychoanalytical structure for more relevant results. This theoretical formulation seems to fail in generalizing any rigid condition of human psychology. Since the levels of penetration differ from one person to another, it is hard to have any kind of determined concept related to this theory. There cannot be any static future related declaration to this theory.

The aspects of managing it cannot have long term sustainability. In spite of some of the apprehensive speculations, this theory also stands rigid to the process of exploring human psychological set up. Prediction of future events can be attained by means of creating a research related to the process of managing human psychological set up. Through a systematic and a qualitative research method this theory can offer predictions related to human nature and can assure the characteristic feature that can specify a particular individual. Proper “prediction of future events” can be thus attained if there is an attempt to realize the base for the management of comprehending human nature.

It is the methodological approach of social theory of penetration that can offer some perspective views by generating personal information of some people. As we manage to understand some basic feature of an individual and can adopt to understand his personal view points, we get hold of managing the same information in comprehending different people with the common features. There is definitely a universal approach led by this theory. However, variations too are integral part of the entire system. Social penetration theory can provide information to understand people from different walks of society, but a t the same time cannot provide rigid and determined results.

Declarations were primitively made regarding the need for “relative simplicity” in social penetration theory. It has been believed that though the theory has got the potentiality to attain relevant information about the personal self of an individual, yet there is the need for establishing relative simplicity in the process of comprehending a ‘self’. Social penetration theory tries to over simplify the ‘self’ of an individual and it is here that the theory losses its base and moves to an ambiguous situation. As the theory tries to get into the inner self of the individual, it manages to run into much deeper consequences. As a mater of fact there is no room for superficial understanding. This misleads the contemporary structure of the society and the individual too gets wrongly identified.

Evaluation of Social Exchange Theory While evaluating social exchange theory, it s important to note the fact that social exchange theory do not consider change as an integral part of its application. In many cases the realization of understanding the demands for social change is believed to be more than enough in a social set up. The usefulness of social exchange theory has been undermined through the behavior maintained by men and women in a socio-cultural construction. Relevance of these approaches is managed through the economic costs and related grounds for achieving rewards within the society. Costs and rewards strategies were always implemented in social context to gain excessive profits from all kinds of exchanges that are accomplished in different relationships. Economic terms are more or less integral part of these exchanged formulations.

For many people a relationship always demands for determined valuation and to evaluate this valuation, proper understanding of the human nature and the relevant environment if very important. The construction of the society depends a lot in the formulations undermined through economic status. In this process, it becomes the sole responsibility of men and women to negotiate through the formats of costs and rewards. The entire theory works for the establishment of interpersonal relationship between different kinds of people. Though the practical persuasion of this theory depends a lot in the economical establishment of managing socio-cultural relations, yet there are diversified points of views for evaluating these infrastructural dimensions.

The most common limitations of social exchange theory have been much explored Miller (2005). According to the researches initiated by Miller, there are many aspects that question the application of social exchange theory on pragmatic grounds. The major objections forwarded by Miller are related to the actual derivative consequences of the theory. He was very clear about the limitations that the theory will show in managing practical applications. According to his observation the social exchange theory reduces the basic levels of human interactions.

There are scopes where people try to understand the each other on moral and ethical grounds, but for this theory the approaches are more related to economical factors than any other base. Further this theory is very weak in terms of dealing with human emotions. In many cases the status of interpersonal relationships are attained through emotional bonding and these bonding get weaken under the formulation of cost and reward structure. As the theory favors absolute openness, it creates room of conflicts in many relationships. There are instances when openness confuses the base of the relationship.

There are instances when many things should not get exposed to openness. These are not secretive acts but are preventive features to save relationship. The characteristic feature of adopting ‘openness’ under the persuasion of this theory might not suit the situation and as such there can be broader levels of confusion among the relationships. Further it can be noted that the ultimate goal of a relationship cannot be ‘intimacy. Though theoretically it can be considered as true, yet on practical fields, the space for intimacy may not sustain. There are possibilities, when a relationship can continue and end with prejudice.

As human life is short the room for intimacy might get limited in some cases. This is the point where the social exchange theory seems to fail. The management of relationships needs a good compromise of ego from both the parties and in human this essence to compromise hardly exists. For many human beings sticking to his decision is more important than to bow and ask for an apology. In such instances the doors for compromise or intimacy never open. As declared by Cook the theory explores “clear conception” for the purpose of gaining resources to add developmental strategies to the society (2000, p.

688). To this initiation Stolte et al., adds the relevance of “well-suited for grasping material/extrinsic exchange” to negotiate the demands of relationships in a socio-cultural context. (2001, p. 411). The theory of social exchange follows a linear structure in human relationship.

This is very complicated context. As no relationship can be assessed on linear context, the application of this theory too gets limited in practical persuasion. There are innumerable instances when this reference of linear structure falls to meet the determined positions of managing human relationships. The most complicated persuasion has been undermined through the bond of marriage. In a marriage, the couple gets in to a linear structure, but the complexities remains in case of the families that are involved in the marriage. Mutual understanding and determined nature for dealing with different kinds of families is a very critical activity.

When it comes to intimacy, the closeness of the relationship can go to and fro and may not stick to the regular conventional expectations. The base for understanding individualistic mindset depends a lot around the application of managing collectivist cultures. Against all kinds of odds there are still some grounds that determine the reliability related to the predominance of this theory in creating mutual understanding among different people and community. The paradigm of exchange paradigm ensures aspirations and that adds enough contexts to the comprehensive declarations of social psychology. The management of sociologgy in this context demands for regular interchanging perspectives. These perspectives are determined as per the generalized formulation of managing al kinds of human relationships.

To exemplify such a situation, we can look into the context for managing resources that generates the psychological expectations among the participants. In terms of considering the fundamental premises of an individual, it becomes necessary to understand the things that he demands and thereby, one can formulize the perspectives of costs and rewards to achieve the determined goal. These goals are directly related to the demands of the person and the factors supporting his personal economic-behavioral structures and formulations. Under the adoption of this theory the society can offer all the individuals with the aspects that can generate proper behavior in them. These aspects can be further enhanced for meeting the demands of the socio-cultural context. In a way, the basic task adopted by society is concerned more with the investigative determination of reciprocating advantages.

The means of reciprocation should be well defined by the social and cultural context. It is through the social exchange theory that the society can attain balanced relationships. The basic formulations will be definitely get determined from noneconomic structure to an advanced macroeconomic formulations. Comparative Analysis In order to compare social penetration theory and social exchange theory, it is very necessary to understand that they are not only interrelated, but also diversifies each others in varied different grounds. Social penetration theory is closer to the ethical and moral expectations of human society, whereas social exchange theory is very much inclined towards the implementation of economical support demanded by any relationship.

In the former one, there is a relevant scope to understand an individual with proper inner speculations. It is the means that can give must time to the observer in realizing the inner feelings and attitudes of the participant. It also concentrates in the gradual developmental process of evolving of relationships in a society. As for the later, the exchange of economic factors for the determination of costs and rewards are the base for understanding the human relationships and the sustainable accounts related to it. As one looks deeper into a ‘self’, the other is very systematic in examining costs and benefits related to each of the relationships. Social penetration theory depends of total modes of continuous communication between the parties.

On the contrary the social exchange theory offers the option to interact between the parties only if there are items of values related to the conversations. The interactions are never considered as a compulsory mode of communication between the parties. According to Baumeister and Vohs (2004, p 5) social exchange theory is related to the positive amount expectations and management of profit determined for both parties that are involved in the case. The factors of rewards and costs are the manipulating conditions for the determination of important concepts that creates basis for most of the social exchange theories. It is through the persuasion of rewards and the exchanged costs that this theory gains the opportunity to generate resources for enhancing pleasure and demands of increasing the levels of satisfaction. Something that is basic and common in both social penetration theory and social exchange theory are relied over the process of assessing human nature and social contexts for a developmental proceeding.

Both the theories generate themselves in determining some of the very fundamental aspects of creating space for progressive initiations in the society. Implementation of social penetration theory and social exchange theory in global periphery can well establish adequate hold over political and social peace and security. It is through social penetration theory that the one can change an individual from inner self (Gamble & Gamble, 1996). On the other hand social exchange theory is competitive enough to provide practical grounds for these modifications. With the motive to gain an increased degree of intimacy, the offers related to exchanged infrastructure is a common practice.

As the former deals with the psychological aspect of managing relationships, the later insists on offering economical determinations for handling socio-cultural and socio-political entities. It is developmental proceedings that reforms human from inner self and reaches the global peripheries. The realization of the individual gets developed to community and ultimately towards the attainment of global peace and security. A combination of both the theories can definitely offer determined base for establishing balanced social norms. As stated by Chelune (1979), social penetration proceeding need to get enough support from the formulations of ‘costs and reward’.

This will help the theory in gaining adequate growth for the management of social and personal expectations of an individual. As these theories start supporting each other, the limitations in both the theories can be met well. According to Chelune (1979), “Rewards and cost are viewed as the motivational units that propel relationships through various stages of development and continuous reciprocity of self-disclosure occurs as long as individuals mutually experience a favorable reward-cost balance” (p. 114). This is a very balanced kind of solution that helps the sociologists to penetrate against all those odds that hinders in social exchange proceedings. A realization from personal to social periphery is very necessary in adopting modifications for the society.

Changes are obvious to the social constructions, and for every determined change the every individual must attained a wider perspective. To this context Blau declared the importance of social exchange theory in the following words, “mutual gratifications persons provide one another that sustain social relations. The basic assumption is that persons establish social associations because they expect them to be rewarding. This implies that the exchange of rewards is a starting mechanism of social relations that is not contingent on norms prescribing obligations” (1994, pp. 152-156)Application of the Theories The applications of these theories are basically means for the establishment of more peaceful and secured conditions in the society. These theories also demands for a generalized version of dealing with different kinds of people.

The expectations of human beings can be well nurtured by the application of these theories o n practical grounds. The ultimate goals of these theories are meant for the management of human psychology and to make human being belief the demands and the importance of comprehending the characteristic features of others. The idea is to understand each other and thereby offer enough support to prevent any kind of conflict oriented situation in the society. It is a process of gradual growth that motivates an individual in managing with his ideological structures and thereby to generate enough hold over the socio-cultural infrastructure. Both the theories try to add enough ground to establish a mutual status among every relationship.

The attempts are generated from personalized relationships to the one that is already determined under social context. The approaches led by social penetration theory are very effective in making an attempt to understand people who are around. In the process, positive attitude needs to get added to the discoveries of interpersonal relationships. This theory manages the process of orienting human feelings and emotional valuations. It supports the developmental structure of human psychology and thereby establishes the space to manage with the relationships. This theory overwhelms the individuals and gives him a chance to look into his inner self.

There are regular investigations led by the other party in understanding the individual. Every attempt is very dominant to the exploratory terms of managing affective stages of dealing with expressions, speeches and declarations of personal attitudes. The initial approach is related to the process of penetration leading it through a systematic mode for a depenetrated status. It is a ride from negative to positive realization. On the other hand, the social exchange theory offers people with the motive f managing social contexts through a process of realization and thereby in dealing with wider perspectives of constructing human social and political structure.

As it moves in to the psychological set up of the society, its impact over the costs and exchange gets stabilized through personal intervention. The basic approach manages to offer the society with a developed social infrastructure. It aims in attaining intimacy among relationships. However, s structured to face diversified consequences. It will be appropriate to declare that both the theories work for social constructions and for the establishment of peace and security. Social penetration theory aims in realizing individual for a balanced social format, whereas social exchange theory looks in tot the inner construction of a society and deals more practically with its problems.

Application of both the theories can well validate the developed means of communications. Communications from all categories are integral to these applications. Since it is through communication that human being can recognize a trouble and can find a relevant solution to it, the importance has been much added to both the theories. Conclusion The evaluation and the comparative analyses initiated for the comprehensive realization of social penetration theory and social exchange theory are the basis for realizing the differences and the importance of these theories in the determination of international context. It can be well concluded that the participation of these theories will definitely promote self realization in every individual and thereby will inspire the community and the society for the establishment of peace and security.

As the social penetration theory observes cyclical model of administering communication, it is the base for individual developmental structure in adding transparency to the individual personality. It is the grass-root venture that adds the importance of personality in an individual. Along with social penetration theory, the role of social exchange theory is also very important. Both these theories concentrate over the development of individual and social relationships in a very strong and gradual mode. These are the theories that are related directly to the participation of individuals in communicative modes and then support all those possibilities that can offer developmental structures to the society and the communities to which the participants belong to.

Social penetration theory is a process that uses the methodological approach of linear model of individual developmental process and prefers long term continual progression. On the other hand, the basic process for promoting exchanged ideological contents in social exchange theory depends on the means of wider perspectives of managing individual thoughts and communicative progressions. It is the process dealing with the dynamics of relationships in broader developmental grounds. The only thing that bothers this theoretical perspective is its approach to the pragmatic class of sociological context. Unlike its title, this theory is not bound to promote the exchanges in society.

They however are well engaged in the process of employing markets and can offer developmental prodigies for developed social and economical infrastructure (Lie, 1997, p. 343). The evaluations have clearly sated that social penetration theory depends a lot in the process of penetrating self-disclosures and the adaptation of vulnerability in socio-political and economic persuasions. For a developed status of human relationships, this theory is an intimate mode of revealing inner entities of the participants. Through self disclosures the communicative proceedings are determined through personalized confidential ratings. These are the steps that are followed through the process of collecting biographical data.

This is the ground for interpreting the preferences of cultural and cross-cultural importance of the individual. The next step is of disclosing individual preferences in terms of choosing and preferring food, clothes and music by the participant. Comprehensive realizations of goals and relevant aspirations of the individual is another step forward for adopting strong social penetration through the individual. Resolving conventional modes of dealings with religious convictions and disclosing fears and romantic flights can be some of the added steps for social penetration within the self. It is the comprehensive ideological understanding of the “self” and the in depth identity of the individual that supports the proceedings of social penetration.

In this context, Eidenmuller (2002) demanded for reaching into the chamber of deep penetration for the formation of intimate relationships between individuals in a society. The conceptual proceeding led by social exchange theory too initiates its goals for universal bonding. However, unlike social penetrations and the modes of disclosures, this theory depends in the chances of offering relevant support to understand social contexts for better existence. The entire theory is generated for a modified social structure that engages the roles of utility-disutility under rational choice, and the participation of modes of allowing reward-punishment under the observations led through the individual behavior. The instinctive feature of human to promote “inborn” status for economic-hedonistic propensities is the core concern of this theory. Though in some instances the theory does to prefer to opt for exchanges, yet in many stages it offers grounds to make appropriate choices.

From individualistic point of view, the theory generates the wider social context and demands for a grass root development of human behavior. It is appropriate to see the declaration made by Emerson (1976, p. 336) about social exchange. For him the theory in general adopts the basic human behavioral assumptions. Baron and Hannan further adds that in the adoption it generates the modes of realizing the operant psychology and the additional participation of utility theory for the maximization of rationality and learning satiation (1994, p.

1133).