Social Exchange Theory
- Created by: 0045253
- Created on: 10-06-22 11:58
View mindmap
- Social Exchange Theory (Thibaut & Kelly,
1959)
- Partners strive to maximise rewards, such as companionship or emotional support, and minimise costs such as stress and time commitments.
- Comparison Level
- Based
on person’s idea of how much reward they deserve to receive in relationships.
- Depends on previous romantic experiences and cultural norms of what is expected from relationships
- People maintain relationships if the Comparison Level is equal to, or better than, what they experienced in their previous relationships.
- Based
on person’s idea of how much reward they deserve to receive in relationships.
- Comparison level for alternatives
- 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 maintain their current relationships as long as they find them more profitable than the alternatives
- SAMPLING Stage
- The costs and rewards of associating with others are explored.
- BARGAINING Stage
- Romantic partners negotiate rewards and costs.
- COMMITMENT Stage
- Sources of costs and rewards are more predictable.
- INSTITUTIONALISATION Stage
- Partners are settled down. Rewards and costs are firmly established.
- STRENGTH
- P - There is evidence support
- E - Sprecher (2001): found that the exchange
variable most highly associated with relationship commitment was partners'
comparison level for alternatives
- E - Sprecher's
study showed that the presence of alternatives was negatively
correlated with both commitment and relationship satisfaction.
- L - Shows important of profit in relationship maintenance.
- E - Sprecher's
study showed that the presence of alternatives was negatively
correlated with both commitment and relationship satisfaction.
- E - Sprecher (2001): found that the exchange
variable most highly associated with relationship commitment was partners'
comparison level for alternatives
- P - Has useful real-life application, for example, Integrated Behavioural Couples Therapy
(IBCT)
- E - 2/3 of couples that were treated using
IBCT reported their relationships had significantly improved and were feeling
happier as a result (Christensen et al, 2004)
- E - IBCT works by increasing the proportion
of positive exchanges in everyday interactions and decrease the proportion of
negative interactions.
- L - SET can be used to help distressed couples in real life.
- E - IBCT works by increasing the proportion
of positive exchanges in everyday interactions and decrease the proportion of
negative interactions.
- E - 2/3 of couples that were treated using
IBCT reported their relationships had significantly improved and were feeling
happier as a result (Christensen et al, 2004)
- P - There is evidence support
- WEAKNESS
- P - A weakness is the SET is deterministic.
- E - The SET is deterministic because it explains a relationship will breakdown if the costs outweigh the benefits.
- E - However, this does not explain why people
remain in abusive relationships.
- L - Therefore, demonstrating that the SET cannot be applied to all relationships because it is deterministic and does not emphasise choice/control over relationships.
- E - However, this does not explain why people
remain in abusive relationships.
- E - The SET is deterministic because it explains a relationship will breakdown if the costs outweigh the benefits.
- P - An alternative explanation to the SET is
the equity
theory.
- E - The
equity theory states if one partner perceives a relationship as unfair, however they're going to be dissatisfied with it regardless of whether they're over-benefitting or under-benefitting.
- E - Research findings suggest that it's not a balance of rewards and costs, but rather perceived fairness of relationships, that keeps partners happy and committed to the relationship.
- L - Therefore, demonstrating Equity Theory has more detail that the SET.
- E - Research findings suggest that it's not a balance of rewards and costs, but rather perceived fairness of relationships, that keeps partners happy and committed to the relationship.
- E - The
equity theory states if one partner perceives a relationship as unfair, however they're going to be dissatisfied with it regardless of whether they're over-benefitting or under-benefitting.
- P - A weakness is the SET is deterministic.
Comments
No comments have yet been made