theories of romantic relationships: social exchange theory

• Thibault and Kelley (1959)

  suggest an economic theory of romantic relationships. cost-benefit analysis, each romantic partner will want to maximise rewards/profit and minimise costs/losses in starting and/or maintaining a relationship. This is known as the min-max principle
• rewards and costs

  • both partners are looking for a mutually beneficial arrangement resulting in a stable and successful relationship
  • Rewards can include self-esteem, entertainment, gaining financial security, friendship. We are more attracted to people who provide such rewards
  • Costs can include giving up time, emotional instability, stress, losing financial security, and loss of opportunities.
  • We are less attracted to people who come with more costs. Some rewards or costs may be viewed as more or less important by different people.
• number of different stages of relationships

  • sampling stage, where couples experiment with the potential costs and rewards of a relationship through direct or indirect interactions
  • bargaining and commitment stages as negotiations of each partner’s role in the relationship occur and the rewards and costs are established and become more predictable
  •  institutionalisation stage where the couple are settled and the norms of the relationship are heavily embedded
• Comparison level (CL)


  an estimation of how rewarding a relationship should be.

  To decide this we compare our current relationship to previous relationships, other people’s relationships, and those we see in the media.

  Therefore acceptable CL changes over our lifetime and is linked to our feelings of self-worth.
• comparison level with alternatives (Clalt)


  People look at other potential partners and consider if that relationship would be higher profit. If higher profit can be found with an alternative relationship then the current relationship will end.
• Duck (1994)


  suggested that a person’s CL is dependent on the level of reward and satisfaction in their current relationship. If the CL is positive, then the person may not consider the potential benefits of a relationship with another person.
• Rusbult

  • questionnaire study of male and female ppts in heterosexual relationships
  • Questions: the costs, rewards, and the level of investment and comparisons with alternatives
  • Findings: costs + benefits applied less at the start of the relationship, but were considered more as the relationship developed
  • Also costs + benefits were considered against alternatives who became less attractive over time as commitment developed, and as satisfaction increased, so did commitment.
  • suggests people consider if they should end their relationships by assessing alternatives and profit - supporting SET
• Argyle (weakness )


  questions whether it is the CL which leads to dissatisfaction with the relationship, or dissatisfaction which leads to this analysis. It may be that Social Exchange Theory serves as a justification for dissatisfaction rather than the cause of it
• Spreecher 


  found in a study of 101 dating couples that as the availability of alternative partners increased, levels of commitment and satisfaction decreased. This suggests that people are more satisfied when there are no alternatives
• (weakness) external validity 


  Operationalising rewards and costs is hugely subjective, making comparisons between people and relationships in controlled settings very difficult. Most studies which are used to support Social Exchange Theory account for this by using artificial procedures in laboratory settings, reducing the external validity of the findings