Social Exchange Theory Flashcards
Social Exchange Theory
Relationships use cost-benefit analysis.
Thibault and Kelly
Profit, loss. maximise rewards, minimise costs. subjective.
Comparison Level
Idea of deserved reward, subjective, depends on experience and cultural norms. linked to self-esteem. compare current to past.
Comparison Level for alternatives
Perceived potential rewards elsewhere higher.
Sampling
Directly explore potential rewards and costs.
Bargaining
Find most profitable exchange, negotiate dynamics.
Commitment
Familiar with sources of rewards and costs, rewards increase, costs decrease.
Floyd et al
Commitment develops when satisfaction and lack of other options exist.
Sprecher
CLA strong predictor of commitment, rewards - satisfaction (especially women)
Supported by Research
CLA strong predictor of commitment, rewards - satisfaction (especially women).
people base evaluation on rewards and costs (CLA) just as set suggests.
so profitability in current vs alternatives dictates commitment.
Lacks Mundane Realism
Emerson and Cook lab exp where 112 bargain to maximise points in a game. these relationships are unlike real life ones. lacks internal validity, set less applicable to real life relationships.
Assumptions That Don’t Hold
Assumes partners keep tallies of profit and loss, and match it. Clark and Mills agree if colleagues, not romantic. rewards distributed freely.
not the balance, but the fairness that affects commitment and satisfaction. weakens validity of SET, which explains a limited range of social relationships.
Cause and Effect
Argyle, dissatisfaction precedes assessment. contradicts SET which assumes the assessment is constant for maintaining.
Real Life Application
Integrated Behavioural Couples Therapy (IBCT), more good, less bad by targeting bad behaviour. Christensen et al 2/3 that used IBCT say improved and happier. SET used to help, benefit for relationship.
Nomothetic
Nomothetic approach, uses laws, may need idiographic as relationships maintain varies by couple.
