social exchange theory

Question 1

Basics of SET

Answer 1

• Social psychologists Thibault and Kelly (1959) describe romantic relationships using the economic terminology of profit (rewards) and loss (costs).
• They claim that partners in relationships strive to maximise rewards (things like companionship, praise, emotional support, sex) and minimise costs (stress, arguments, compromises, time commitments).
• Notions of rewards and costs are subjective (what is considered very costly by one person, can be seen as low cost or even a reward by another);
• Costs also tend to change over time (what is considered costly at the beginning of the relationships seems less so as relationships develop).

Question 2

Comparison level

Answer 2

• The first level, called Comparison Level (CL), is based on person’s idea of how much reward they deserve to receive in relationships.
• This understanding is subjective and depends on previous romantic experiences and cultural norms of what is appropriate to expect from relationships; these norms are reinforced by books, films and TV programmes.
• Comparison Levels are closely linked to person’s self-esteem - a person with high self-esteem will have higher expectations of rewards in relationships, whereas a person with low self-esteem will have lower expectations.
• People consider relationships worth pursuing if the Comparison Level is equal to, or better than, what they experienced in their previous relationships.

Question 3

Comparison level for alternatives

Answer 3

• The second level, called Comparison Level for alternatives (CLalt), concerns a person’s perception of whether other potential relationships (or staying on their own) would be more rewarding than being in their current relationship.
• According to Social Exchange Theory, people will stick to their current relationships as long as they find them more profitable than the alternatives.
• Furthermore, according to some psychologists, such as Duck, if people consider themselves to be content in their current relationships, they may not even notice that there are available alternatives.

Question 4

stages of relationship development

Answer 4

• Sampling Stage
• Exploring Costs and benefits of relationships by experimenting or observing.

• Bargaining Stage
• Beginning of the relationship → social exchange commences

• Commitment Stage
• Costs and rewards become predictable → rewards increase and costs lessen.

• Institutionalization Stage
• Partner are settled - the terms of the relationship, in terms of costs and benefits, are now established.

Question 5

strength-research support

Answer 5

Although support for social exchange theory is limited there are some studies that back it up.

For example, SET is supported by research studies by Sprecher (2001), who found that Comparison Levels for alternatives were a strong predictor of commitment in a relationship and that rewards were important as a predictor of satisfaction, especially for women.

Based on these findings, it can be concluded that some people appear to base their evaluation of romantic relationships on rewards and costs (in particular, Comparison Level for alternatives), just as SET suggests.

Therefore, it would appear that some people do stay in their current relationship while it remains more profitable than the alternatives.

Question 6

limitation- cause and effect

Answer 6

Some researchers argue that there is an issue with cause and effect in regards to SET assumptions.

Argyle (1987) argues that people rarely start assessing their relationships before they feel unsatisfied with them.

For example, being unhappy in relationships may lead a person to question whether there are more rewards than costs in their relationships and the potential alternatives, but these thoughts occur only after the dissatisfaction is discovered.

This contradicts SET, which assumes that assessing profit and loss is the way in which all relationships are maintained, even happy ones.

Question 7

limitation-issues and debates

Answer 7

Social Exchange theory has been criticised for being high reductionist.

Basing the explanation of such complex phenomenon as romantic relationships purely on costs and rewards makes limits the range of real life romantic experiences it can explain.

For example, SET does not explain why many people stay in abusive relationships despite the lack of rewards and overwhelming costs.

This suggests that a holistic approach to studying romantic relationships may be better suited to explaining the complexity of relationships maintenance.