Social exchange theory

Question 1

What does SET predict

Answer 1

We stay only so long as this relationship is more rewarding than the alternatives

Question 2

Who proposed SET

Answer 2

Thibault and Kelley

Question 3

Rewards, costs and profits

Answer 3

Minimax principle
- Maximise rewards (love, companionship, pleasure)
- Minimise costs (time, stress)
- a relationship is profitable if the rewards exceed the costs

Question 4

Homans

Answer 4

Borrowed concepts from economics and from SKinner’s theory of operant conditioning

Question 5

Costs

Answer 5

Money, time, emotional costs produced by loss, betrayal and jealousy

Question 6

Rewards

Answer 6

Anything that makes us feel valued; money, status, attention

Question 7

Outcome

Answer 7

Outcome = rewards - costs

Question 8

Comparison level

Answer 8

The amount of reward you believe you deserve to get from the relationship, influenced by previous experience and social norms
- Link with self esteem

Question 9

Comparison level of alternatives

Answer 9

Whether someone can get greater outcome in another relationship

Question 10

Duck

Answer 10

The CLalt we adopt will depend on the state of our current relationship

Question 11

Stages of relationship development

Answer 11

Sampling, bargaining, commitment, institutional

Question 12

Sampling

Answer 12

Experiment with rewards and costs in our relationships

Question 13

Bargaining

Answer 13

We negotiate rewards and costs at the start of a relationship

Question 14

Commitment

Answer 14

Rewards increase and costs lesson so the relationship stabilises

Question 15

Institutionalism

Answer 15

Normative rewards and costs are well established

Question 16

Eval - research support

Answer 16

• Strength
• Research studies
• Kurdek asked gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples to complete questionnaire
• Measures relationship commitment and SET variables
• More committed partners perceived most rewards and fewest costs
• Research findings match predictions - validity of theory in gay, lesbian and heterosexual

Question 17

Eval - counterpoint

Answer 17

• Studies ignore equity
• What matters is not just balance of rewards and costs
• Instead - partners’ perceptions that this is far
• SET is a limited explanation - cannot account for a significant proportion of research findings on relationships

Question 18

Eval - direction of cause and effect

Answer 18

• Limitation
• Claims dissatisfaction arises after relationship stops being profitable
• Argyle - we don’t monitor costs and rewards or consider alternatives until after we are dissatisfied
• When satisfied with relationship and committed to it - do not notice alternatives
• Considering costs/ alternatives is caused by dissatisfaction rather than the reverse
• Miller - those rating themselves as being in highly committed relationship spent less time looking at images of attractive people, good predictor of relationship continuing

Question 19

Eval - vague concepts

Answer 19

• Limitation
• SET deals are vague and hard to quantify
• Real-world psychological rewards and costs are subjective and harder to define
• Rewards and costs vary a lot from one person to another
• Concept of comparison levels - unclear what the values of CL and Clalt must be before dissatisfaction
• Theory is difficult to test in a valid way

Question 20

Eval - inappropriate central assumptions

Answer 20

• SET assumes relationships are economic in nature
• Clark and Mills - cannot apply this to romantic relations as they are communal-based
• Romantic partners do not ‘keep score’ - would destroy trust

Question 21

Eval - explain abusive relationships

Answer 21

• Strength - explain why people stay in abusive relationships
• Explanatory strength of the theory
  Practical applications