AO3

• Limitation 1: SET is based on an inappropriate central assumption. Clark & Mills argue that we can’t apply economic principles to romantic relationships as relationships are COMMUNAL based. By keeping scores, it can destroy trust
• Limitation 2: Direction of cause and effect is not clear. Argyle et al. argues that we don’t monitor costs and rewards or consider alternatives until after we’re dissatisfied. Dissatisfaction leads to the consideration of costs/alternatives. (Rather than relationships stop being profitable/alternatives are more attractive leads to dissatisfaction)
• Limitation 3: Vague Concepts


  It is difficult to measure psychological rewards and costs like loyalty, feeling safe. Rewards and costs are vague and hard to quantify. They are subjective and hard to define. Therefore SET is difficult to test in a valid way
• Who found research support for SET?

  Kurdeck 1995
• Kurdeck’s study


  Studied gay, lesbian and heterosexual couples. Measured commitment and SET variables. Most committed= perceived most rewards and fewer costs+ viewed alternatives as unattractive
• What is a counterpoint to studies in SET (like Kurdeck’s)?


  It ignored one crucial factor that may be an overwhelming consideration for romantic partners- equity.