Set And Equity theory Flashcards
Social exchange theory
A theory of how relationships form and develop
According to SET how are satisfying and committed relationships maintained
When rewards exceed costs and potential alternatives are less attractive than the current relationship
Rewards, costs and profits
Thibault and Kelly contend that behaviour in relationships reflect the economic assumptions of exchange. They say we try to minimise losses and maximise gains. We judge our satisfaction with a relationships in terms of the profit it yields, defined as the rewards minus the costs
Comparison level
The amount of reward u believe you should get
It develops out of experience of previous relationships which feed our expectations out of our current one. It is also influenced by social norms. We consider a relationship worth pursuing if our CL is high. Someone with a low self esteem will have a low CLand will therefore be satisfied with gaining just a small profit from relationship
Comparison level for alternatives
2nd measure of profit provides a wider contexts of our current relationship. SET predicted that we will stay in our current relationship only so long as we believe it is more rewarding than alternatives
Stages of relationship development (SET)
Sampling stage :we explore the rewards and costs of social exchange by experimenting with them in our own relationships
Bargaining stage: this Mark’s the beginning of a relationship, when romantic partners start exchanging various costs and rewards, negotiating and identifying what is most profitable
Commitment stage: as time goes on , the sources of costs and rewards become more predictable and the relationship becomes more stable as rewards increase and costs lessen
Institutionalisation stage: the partners are now settled down because the norms of the relationship, in terms of rewards and costs, are firmly established
Equity theory
An economic theory of how relationships develop. As such, it acknowledges the impact of rewards amd costs on relationship satisfaction, but criticises the SET for ignoring the central role of equity - the perception that partners have that the distribution of rewards ajd costs in the relationship is fair.
According to Walster and her colleague what matters most with equity is…
That both partners’ level of profit is roughly the same. When there is a lack of equity then one partner over benefits and the other under benefits front the relationship and this causes dissatisfaction.
According to equity theory , it’s not the size or amount of the rewards and costs that matter:its the…
Ratio of the two to each other
Consequences of inequity
A partner who puts a great deal in the relationship but gets little out of it will become distressed and dissatisfied with the relationship. The greater the perceived inequity, the greater the dissatisfaction: equity theory predicts a strong correlation between the two
What makes us most dissatisfied is a change in the level of perceived equity as time goes on. The ‘put-upon’ partner will work hard to make the relationship more equitable as long as they believe it’s possible to do s. The more unfair the rs feels the harder they will work to restore equity. Another possible outcome is that they will revise their perceptions of rewards and costs so that the rs feels more equitable to them, even if nothing changes .
AO3: Supporting research evidence for equity theory
Supporting evidence includes studies of real-life relationships that confirm equity theory as a more valid explanation than SET. Utne and her colleagues carried out a survey of 118 recently married couples, measuring equity with two self-report scales. These husbands and wives had been together for more than 2 years before marrying. The researchers found that the couple who found their relationship equitable were more satisfied than those who saw themselves as overbenefitting or underbenefitting. This research confirms a central prediction of equity theory increasing its validity as an explanation of romantic relationships.
AO3: cultural influences (equity theory)
Equity theory assumes that the need for equity is a universal feature of romantic relationships across all cultures, because it Is a fundamental feature of human behaviour. However, Aumer-Ryan et al. Found that there wre cultural differences in the link between equity and satisfaction. The researchers compared couples in collectivist cultures with those in an individualist culture. Couple from an individualist culture considered their relationships to be most satisfying when the relationship was equitable, whereas partners in the collectivist culture were most satisfied when they were overbenefittting. This was true of both men and women. This suggests that equity theory claim that equity is a universal need in relationships is unwarranted. So the theory is limited because it cannot account for this cultural difference.
AO3:individual differences (equity theory)
Not all partners in romantic relationships are concerned about achieving equity. Huseman et al suggest that some people are less sensitive to equity than others. They describe some partners we benevolents, who are prepared to contribute more to the relationship than they get out of it. Others wre entitleds who believe they deserve to he over benefitted and accept it without feeling distressed or guilty. This shows that equity is not necessarily a global feature of all romantic relationships and, contrary to the claims of the theory, is certainly not a universal law of social interaction
