Evaluation

• Not applicable to romantic relationships

  -Psychologists question the economic assumptions that underpin the theory.

  -It assumes that individuals in romantic relationships closely monitor the exchanges, costs and rewards, that are taking place.

  -Its highly probable that for a business partner/professional relationships where close monitoring is needed however these exchanges do not occur in romantic relationships.

  -Psychologists argue that if our partners were keeping track of the costs and rewards exchanged then it would make us question the commitment and may lead to dissatisfaction.
• Issues with operationalisation but explains individual differences.

  -the concepts of costs and rewards are difficult to operationalise.

  -Perceptions of cost are subjective and change over time.

  -There is no cut off point as to how much better alternative must be before an individual feels dissatisfied.

  -SET lacks ecological validity and cannot be generalised to romantic relationships.

  -HOWEVER, SET acknowledges the subjective nature of cost and reward. E.g. someone may see cooking as a chore whereas someone else may see it as pleasurable. accounts for individual differences.
• Rusbult's elaboration recognises investment size

  -SET underestimates the importance of investment size as a factor influencing commitment in relationships.

  -Rusbult's theory supports some aspects of SET in that individuals assesses the exchanges taking place by using comparison levels.

  -However, her research into abusive relationships found that even of the rewards fell below an individuals comparison level and alternative provide greater rewards, the individuals remain committed because if how much they have invested which would be a loss in the end.
• Underestimates the importance of equity

  -Equity theory argues that couples are more concerned about achieving fairness in their exchanges.

  -Equity theory challenges that it argues the most satisfied and stable relationships are the ones where exchanges are proportionate and fair.

  -SET suggests low costs for high rewards would produce satisfaction, equity theory would argue that these individuals would feel guilt and shame as they are over-benefiting from this exchange.