The Social Exchange Theory (SET)
- Created by: xqueenlatifahx
- Created on: 01-04-20 16:00
View mindmap
- Social Exchange Theory (SET)
- Comparison level
- Thibaut and Kelley proposed that we develop a comparison level (CL) - a standard against which all our relationships are judged.
- Comparison levels are the product of our experiences in other relationships and our general views on expectations of partners.
- A relationship deemed worthwhile will exceed our current CL.
- There are also comparison levels for alternative partners (CLalt) - a person weighs up a potential increase in rewards from a different person.
- Profit and loss
- This theory assumes that all social behaviour is a series of exchanges; individuals attempt to maximise their rewards and minimise their costs.
- Social
exchange- In
society, people exchange resources with the expectation that they will earn a
‘profit’
- economic theories of human behaviour, stresses that commitment to a relationship is dependent on the profitability of this outcome.
- A
relationship is maintained if rewards exceed costs and the profit level is not
exceeded by possible alternative relationships
- Thibaut and Kelley et al (1959)
- proposed
a four stage model setting out how relationships could be maintained via
predictable exchanges
- 4 Stages Model
- 4.INSTITUTIONALISATION Interactions are established and the couple ‘settle down’
- 2.BARGAINING A relationship is ‘costed out’ and sources of profit and loss are identified
- 3.COMMITMENT Relationship is established and maintained by a predictable exchange of rewards
- 1.SAMPLINGRewards and costs are assessed in a number of relationships
- 4 Stages Model
- proposed
a four stage model setting out how relationships could be maintained via
predictable exchanges
- Thibaut and Kelley et al (1959)
- There
are several different versions of SET, but underlying them all is the view that
people are selfish.
- Homans (1974)
- believes that people view their feelings for others in terms of profits- that is, the rewards obtained from the relationships minus the costs.
- HATFIELD - people in under-benefited rels = angry & deprived, over-ben rels = guilty & uncomfortable
- Homans (1974)
- Evaluation (AO3)
- research concentrated on short-term rels, not on the consequences of long-terms rels, where maintenance = more important
- perception is NOT a criticism of theory - that's how it actually is in rels. Someone's behav is based on their perception
- doesn't consider emotions / feelings of people
- ARGYLE - claimed methodology was artificial, with little relevance to real life
- Selfish approach to maintenance / breakdown of rel -> selfish
- theory applies to people who 'keep score' - people who are more suspicious and insecure. Suggetss theory only relates to people lacking confidence and mutuak trust
- cultural bias
- Moghaddam et al – such economic theories only apply to Western individuals with high mobility e.g. students who are typically mobile and many short-term
- Where there is little time to develop long-term commitment it makes sense to be concerned with give and take
- With less mobile populations, more likely to value security than personal profit
- Where there is little time to develop long-term commitment it makes sense to be concerned with give and take
- Moghaddam et al – such economic theories only apply to Western individuals with high mobility e.g. students who are typically mobile and many short-term
- Comparison level
Comments
No comments have yet been made