Relationships; Social Exchange Theory

?
Social Exchange Theory - Thibault and Kelley (1959)
Theory of how relationships form and develop. It assumes that partners act out of self-interest in exchanging rewards and costs. A satisfying relationship is maintained when rewards exceed costs and alternatives are less attractive.
1 of 12
Rewards, Costs and Profits
Minimax principle (minimise loses/maximise gains). Rewards are seen as different levels of significant or what once was seen as rewarding may not later on. Rewards also include benefitial thins e.g sex, companionship or economic e.g time and energy.
2 of 12
Comparison Level (CL)
CL is the amount of reward you feel you should get due to previous relationships to expectations of the new one. Also influenced by social norms by what is widely considered. CL changes as we get more 'data'. High self-estee in those with high CL.
3 of 12
Comparison Level for Alternatives (CLalt)
Duck (1994) said the CLalt we adpot depends on the state of the current relationship. If costs outweigh the rewards currently, the alternatives become more attractive. Satisfaction in a relationship means you may not notice avaliable alternatives.
4 of 12
Stages of Relationship Development; Sampling Stage 1
We explore the rewards and costs of social exchange by experimenting with them in our own relationships (not just romantic ones), or by observing others doing so.
5 of 12
Stages of Romantic Development; Bargaining Stage 2
This marks the beginning of a relationship, when romantic partners start exchanging various rewards and costs, negotiating and identifying what is most profitable.
6 of 12
Stages of Romantic Development; Commitment Stage 3
As time goes on, the sources of cost and rewards become more predictable and the relationship becomes more stable as rewards increase and costs lessen.
7 of 12
Stage of Romantic Development; Institutionalisation Stage 4
The partners are now settled down because the norms pf the relationship, in terms of rewards and costs, are firmly established.
8 of 12
Clark and Mills (2011) - Inappropriate Asumptions Underlying SET
Theory fails to distiguish between types of relationships; exchange e.g collegues involves social exchange but communal e.g partners are based on rewards without keepign score. If monitoring occured, would question commitment.
9 of 12
Miller (1997) - Supporting Research
Found people that rated themselves as being committed in relationship spent less time looking at attractive people and predicts lasting over 2 months. Committed people spend less time looking at attractive alternatives.
10 of 12
SET Ignores Equity
Set ignores the important factor of equity theory and that this is more important than rewards and costs. Neglecting this means SET is a limited explaination of relationships.
11 of 12
Problems Measuirng SET
Concepts difficult to quantify, rewards must be defined superficially e.g money to measure them. Psychological rewards are subjective and hard to define. Unclear of what the values of CL must be for disatisfaction to occur to threatern relationships.
12 of 12

Other cards in this set

Card 2

Front

Rewards, Costs and Profits

Back

Minimax principle (minimise loses/maximise gains). Rewards are seen as different levels of significant or what once was seen as rewarding may not later on. Rewards also include benefitial thins e.g sex, companionship or economic e.g time and energy.

Card 3

Front

Comparison Level (CL)

Back

Preview of the front of card 3

Card 4

Front

Comparison Level for Alternatives (CLalt)

Back

Preview of the front of card 4

Card 5

Front

Stages of Relationship Development; Sampling Stage 1

Back

Preview of the front of card 5
View more cards

Comments

No comments have yet been made

Similar Psychology resources:

See all Psychology resources »See all Relationships resources »