4. Social Exchange Theory

Social Exchange Theory

SET is an economic theory of relationships. People form, maintain and end relationships by evaluating costs (arguments, time, effort, money) and benefits (gifts, emotional support, affection).

We do this on 2 levels

1) Comparison Level (CL)

2) Comparison Level of Alternatives (CL-Alt)

Comparison Level (CL)

It’s the standard a person uses to decide whether a relationship is satisfying. It’s based on memories of past experiences, expectations about what we want/expect in the future.

When we meet a potential partner, we use CL to assess whether the profit of this new relationship exceeds our expectations- if so, a relationship does form.

Comparison Level of Alternatives (CL-Alt)

SET suggests that people compare their current relationship with the costs and benefits of other possible relationships. A person will stay in their current relationship when they believe it is more profitable than the alternatives available.

If the potential profit of new relationship>costs of ending one, then we will go for the more profitable option.

4 Stages of Relationships

1) Sampling- people consider the potential costs and benefits of a relationship and compare these with other relationships available at the time.

2) Bargaining- partners give and receive rewards to test their the relationship is worthwhile.

3) Commitment- relationship becomes more predictable, so each partner knows how to obtain rewards from the other, which lowers costs(effort).

4) Institutionalisation- relationship norms are developed, which establishes the pattern of costs and benefits for each partner.

Evaluations for Social Exchange Theory (SET)

Supporting research

Ev: Research found that people who felt over benefitted in their relationships felt guilty and uncomfortable, whereas people who felt under benefitted felt angry and deprived by their partner. Ex: Supports SET, as suggest that people are affected by whether they receive a fair balance of costs and benefits in their relationship. Feeling that the exchange is unfair can lead to negative emotions. L: High internal val., as findings support evidence that perceived costs, benefits and fairness can affect how people feel within relationships.

Contradictory research

Ev: Research found that people who rated themselves as being in highly committed relationships spent less time looking at images of attractive people. Ex: Challenges CL-Alt, as SET suggests that people compare their current relationship with possible alternatives. Highly committed people may not consider alternatives in the same way. L: Low reliability, as the idea of comparing alternatives may not consistently apply to people in highly committed relationships.

Simplistic (doesn’t account for diff types of relationships)

Ev: Research identified exchange relationships, which are more likely between work colleagues and communal relationships, which are more likely between romantic couples. Communal relationships still involve giving and receiving rewards, but without keeping track of them. Ex: Challenges SET, as romantic partners may not constantly calculate the costs and benefits they give and receive. Instead, they may give to their partner without expecting an immediate reward in return. L: Low external val., as theory may not accurately explain the complexity of real-world romantic relationships.