Social exchange theory

• What is SET?

  • This is an economic theory based on relationships in terms of trading and exchange of commodities.
  • We haggle and negotiate and try driving the best bargain we can.
  • It is based on the principle depending on the exchange of rewards and costs. 
  • The most satisfying and enduring relationships are those that bring in the highest rewards and least costs for both parties. 
• Profit explanation?

  • For a relationship to maintain, rewards - costs should result in a positive outcome for each individual.
  • Thibault and Kelley (1959) believed that individual members of a relationship are motivated to maximise their rewards but decrease their costs as well.
  • Rewards and costs are subjective; you may consider receiving a compliment from your partner in exchange for sex, companionship etc.
  • The cost may be effort, financial cost or missed opportunities 
• What is comparison level?

  • Thibault and Kelley propose we develop a comparison level - a standard against which all our relationships are judged. 
  • Comparison level is a mix of our past experiences along with a general view of what we expect from our relationships or may be influenced by media.
  • This can change as we get more experiences under our belt. 
  • If the potential profit or actual profit exceeds our CL, the relationship will be judged as worthwhile.
  • If the final result is negative, we will be dissatisfied. 
• What is comparison level - alternatives?

  • This is where the person weighs up potential rewards from someone else against costs with ending their relationship.
  • A new relationship may take place if the current one is lower in profit. 
• Supporting evidence for SET?

  • Sprecher (2004) - They conducted a longitudinal study of 101 dating couples at a US university and found the presence of alternatives was the biggest predictor of relationship satisfaction.
  • There was a strong negative correlation between number of alternatives and relationship satisfaction.
  • More alternatives = less satisfaction.
  • They concluded that having more comparisons for alternatives means you are likely to breakdown your relationship. 
• Negative evaluation with SET validity?

  • Another problem is that the majority of studies to support SET use artificial tasks.
  • One procedure involves two strangers in a game situation where they distribute rewards and costs.
  • They know nothing about each other and the relationship consists solely of the game.
  • This has been generalized to everyday relationships.
  • Therefore, it lacks ecological validity and realistic studies using real couples have been less supportive of this theory and theory may not be valid.
• Negative evaluation regarding vague nature of SET?

  • This theory suggests that partners measure costs and benefits but it is unclear.
  • How do you compare the benefit of seeing your children every day to arguing with your partner?
  • It is unclear what the value of the CL and CLalt need to be to threaten a relationship; how attractive is the alternative?
  • It is not possible to measure it so it cannot be a valid explanation of relationships. 
• Negative evaluation regarding reductionism?

  • SET can be criticised as being reductionist as it simplifies relationships to profits and losses.
  • It ignores reproductive success and strategy.
  • It also ignores emotion as people in unrewarding relationships may stay due to loving their partner.
  • They may also be defensive despite their other being abusive.
  • It also argues that partners are out to maximise profit in relationships but does not account for equity or fairness.