Theories of romantic relationships: Social Exchange Theory Flashcards
What is the Social Exchange Theory?
The Social Exchange Theory suggests that romantic relationships are maintained through a cost-benefit analysis, where individuals seek to maximise rewards and minimise costs. A relationship continues if the perceived rewards outweigh the costs and if it compares favourably to alternatives.
- Possible rewards - companionship, being cared for and sex.
- Possible costs - effort, financial costs and missed opportunities.
Who proposed the Social Exchange Theory?
Thibault and Kelley
Thibault and Kelly proposed that relationships go through 4 stages:
- Sampling - the costs and rewards of associating with others are explored.
- Bargaining - a process of negotiation in which costs and rewards are agreed.
- Commitment - exchange of rewards and acceptance of cots stabilise. There is a greater focus on the relationship itself.
- Institutionalisation - norms and expectations are firmly established.
The ‘Comparison Level’ (CL)
- People use levels of comparison to assess how profitable their relationships are.
- The ‘Comparison Level’ (CL) is based on a 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 also closely linked with a 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.
Comparison Level for alternatives (CLalt)
- The second level, ‘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 this theory, people will stick to their current relationships as long as they find the more profitable than alternatives.
- Furthermore, according to some psychologists, such as Duck, if people consider themselves to be content in their current relationship, they may not even notice that there are available alternatives.
Strength
point: There is research supporting the Social Exchange Theory.
evidence: Marelich et al. surveyed 267 US students and found that men were more likely to use deception (e.g., pretending to care or be committed) to gain sexual rewards, while women were more likely to have sex to avoid confrontation, gain partner approval and enhance intimacy.
justification: This increases the credibility of this theory as it suggests that individuals engage in a cost-benefit analysis when making relationship decisions particularly in the context of sexual behaviour.
Strength
point: There is further research supporting the Social Exchange Theory.
evidence: Kurdek and Schmitt studied 185 couples; 44 heterosexual couples, 35 co-habiting heterosexual couples, 50 same-sex male couples and 56 same-sex female couples. Participants completed a questionnaire independently, without discussing their answers with their partner. The results showed that for all relationship types, greater relationship satisfaction was associated with higher perceived benefits (CL) and lower perceived attractiveness of alternatives (CLalt).
justification: This strengthens the credibility of this theory as the findings provide strong empirical evidence by demonstrating that the evaluation of rewards and alternatives plays a key role in relationship satisfaction regardless of the relationship structure. The fact that heterosexual and homosexual couples showed similar patterns serves to heighten the reliability and generalisability of this theory as it suggests that the principles of cost-benefit analysis in relationships is universal.
Strength
point: A strength of the Social Exchange Theory is its real-world application.
evidence: Economic theories like the Social Exchange Theory acknowledge the importance of cost, profit and comparison levels in relationship maintenance. These elements have been applied in Integrated Behavioural Couples Therapy (IBCT) which trains partners to increase positive exchanges and reduce negative behaviours in their daily interactions. Christensen et al. found that, out of over 60 distressed couples, approximately two-thirds reported significant improvements in their relationship satisfaction and overall happiness following IBCT. The success of IBCT demonstrates that actively managing relationship exchanges can lead to long-term stability and that relationship satisfaction is ultimately influenced by balancing rewards and costs.
justification: This increases the validity of this theory as it demonstrates that its’ principles are not just theoretical but can be applied effectively in therapeutic settings to enhance relationship quality.
Weakness
point: A limitation of the Social Exchange Theory is that it does not establish a clear cause-and-effect relationship between relationship satisfaction and comparison level analysis.
evidence: Argyle argues that individuals do not typically assess rewards and costs of their relationships unless they are already dissatisfied. He suggests that relationship dissatisfaction leads to comparison level analysis, rather than comparison level analysis determining satisfaction, as the Social Exchange Theory proposed. This challenges the Social Exchange Theory’s claim that people continuously engage in a cost-benefit analysis to maintain their relationship as it suggests that satisfied couples may not consciously monitor their relationship’s balance at all.
justification: As a result, this reduces the scientific credibility of this theory as a clear causal relationship is not identified. This inability to establish causality therefore implies that alternative theories, such as Equity Theory or Investment Model may provide a more accurate explanation of relationship maintenance.
