theories of romantic relationships: social exchange theory Flashcards
what is social exchange theory? (thibault and kelley 1959)
- behaviour in relationships reflects the economic assumptions of exchange
- we try to minimise losses and maximise gains
- we judge our satisfaction in a relationship in terms of the profit it yields ie. rewards-costs
how are rewards and costs subjective?
- what one person considers a significant reward might be viewed by someone else as less valuable
- value of rewards and costs can change over the course of a relationship
examples of rewards in romantic relationships
- companionship
- sex
- emotional support
- praise
- shared economic output
examples of costs in romantic relationships
- time
- stress
- energy
- compromise
- opportunity cost
how can relationships be described in economic terms?
- relationships can be expensive (blau 1964)
- opportunity cost
what is opportunity cost in terms of romantic relationships?
investment of time and energy in your current relationship means using resources that you cannot invest elsewhere
what are the 2 ways we measure profit in romantic relationships?
- comparison level (CL)
- comparison level for alternatives (CLalt)
what is the comparison level (CL)?
- amount of reward you believe you deserve to get
- changes as you experience more social norms and have more relationships
- consider a relationship worth pursuing if your CL is high
what is CL influenced by?
- experiences of previous relationships, which feed into our expectations of the current one
- social norms that determine what is widely considered, within a culture, to be a reasonable level of reward
- books, film, TV programmes etc.
how is CL linked to self-esteem?
- someone with low self-esteem will have a low CL and be satisfied with gaining a small profit from a relationship
- someone with higher self-esteem will believe they are worth a lot more
what does the CLalt provide?
- wider context for our current relationship
- do we believe we could gain greater rewards and fewer costs from another relationship or from being on our own?
what does the CLalt we adopt depend on? (duck 1994)
- the state of our current relationship
- if the costs of our current outweigh the rewards, alternatives become more attractive
what are the 4 stages of relationship development? (thibault and kelley 1959)
- sampling stage
- bargaining stage
- commitment stage
- insititutionalisation stage
what happens in the sampling stage of relationship development?
- explore the rewards and costs of social exchange by experimenting with them in our own relationships
- observe others doing so
what happens in the bargaining stage of relationship development?
- relationship begins
- romantic partners start exchanging various rewards and costs
- negotiate and identify what is most profitable
what happens in the commitment stage of relationship development?
- as time goes on, the sources of costs and rewards beome more predictable
- relationship becomes more stable as rewards increase and costs lessen
what happens in the insititutionalisation stage of relationship development?
- partners are settled down
- normns of the relationship, in terms of rewards and costs, are firmly established
evaluation: research support (kurdek 1995)
- asked gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples to complete questionnaires measuring relationship commitment and SET variables
- partners who were most committed also percieved the most rewards and fewest costs, and viewed alternatives as relatively unattractive
- demonstrates that the main SET concepts that predict commitment are independent of each other, so individually have an effect
evaluation: studies into SET ignore equity
- much research support for the role of equity in relationships
- what matters is not just the balance of rewards and costs, but the partners’ perceptions that this is fair
- neglect of equity means that SET is a limited explanations which cannot account for a significant proportion of the research findings on relationships
evaluation: direction of cause and effect (argyle 1987)
- argued that we don’t monitor costs and rewards, or consider alternatives, until after we are disatisfied
- when we are satisfied with a relationship and committed to it, we don’t even notice potentially attractive alternatives
- considering costs / alternatives is caused by dissatisfaction, rather than dissatisfaction causing a person to consider costs / alternatives
evaluation: SET’s concepts are vague and hard to quantify
- rewards and costs have to be defined superficially in research (eg. money) to measure them
- real-world psychological rewards and costs are subjective and harder to define
- rewards and costs vary a lot from one person to another
- unclear what the values of CL and CLalt must be before dissatisfaction threatens a relationship
- theory is difficult to test in a valid way
evaluation: inappropriate central assumptions (clark and mills 2011)
- cannot apply economic concepts of exchange of rewards and costs, profit and loss to relationships
- constant monitoring to determine levels of satisfaction would destory the trust that underlies a close emotional relationship
