Social Exchange Theory & Relationships (DP IB Psychology): Revision Note

Social exchange theory

• Social Exchange Theory is considered an economic theory of relationships, as it uses the language of banking, investment, and finance to explain how relationships function

• The theory was proposed by Thibault and Kelley (1959) to explain how individuals assess the costs and benefits of their relationships

Mechanism of exchange

• For a relationship to thrive, each partner must feel rewarded and experience a sense of profit

• Couples negotiate the terms of exchange, either directly through communication or indirectly through experience and learning

  • E.g., Bertie learns that he should always compliment Betty on her cooking, which benefits her and strengthens their bond

Implications for relationships

• By continually balancing and negotiating costs and benefits, couples can maintain relationships that feel fair and equitable.

• When partners perceive the exchange as just, the relationship is more likely to be stable and satisfying.

SET & romantic relationships

• SET operates along the minimax principle

  • The idea that people in relationships will aim to minimise their losses and maximise their profits as would a business (profits equal rewards minus costs)

• Rewards, costs and losses are entirely subjective and will differ per relationship

  • E.g., Betty enjoys feeling rewarded when her cooking is praised, but Bertie does not consider this to be important

• Relationships require certain sacrifices, which offset the rewards (and in the long run may contribute to building a more rewarding relationship)

  • E.g., foregoing nights out at the pub for a quiet night in, living in a town instead of the countryside, putting up with each other’s family etc.

• Costs can, however, destabilise a relationship if they lead to arguments, conflict, resentment, etc., so a fine balance is required

  • This may take time to achieve and is only achievable via hard work and much compromise on both sides

Research which supports SET & relationships

Utne et al. (1984)

Aim:

• To investigate the level of satisfaction felt by married couples in terms of how equitable each partner felt their relationship was

Participants:

• 118 married couples from the USA

• The couples ranged in age from 16-45 years (mean age = 26 years for males; 24 years for females)

• Most of the couples had dated seriously for over two years before marrying

• 74% of the couples had been married for just four months or less

Procedure:

• Interviews were conducted with each husband and wife being interviewed separately

• The researchers asked each partner questions on a range of topics, including:

  • the history of the relationship

  • perceived equity/inequity within the relationship

  • satisfaction with the marriage

  • the perceived stability of the marriage

Results:

• The couples in equitable relationships expressed the highest levels of contentment and satisfaction with the relationship

• Partners who felt that their benefits outweighed their costs (i.e., inequity in the relationship) felt uneasy and guilty about this imbalance

Conclusion:

• The most successful relationships appear to be those in which each partner feels that costs and benefits are divided fairly and equitably.

Evaluation of social exchange theory & relationships

Strengths

• Some research has found that couples therapy which includes the increase of rewards and reduction in costs, has a hugely beneficial effect on the couples’ joint satisfaction and happiness in the relationship

• There is some real-world application to SET, as common sense would tell us that relationships are bound to be judged according to whether or not the costs outweigh the rewards (and vice versa)

Limitations

• One of the major difficulties in attempting to measure SET is that rewards, costs and profit are subjective variables that will differ from person to person, making it difficult to operationalise research

  • This limits the reliability of the theory

• Humans are complex and often unpredictable, so attempting to apply an artificial construct drawn from economics to relationships is fraught with difficulty

  • Thus, there is a lack of ecological validity to both the theory itself and the research involved in SET

Link to concepts

Change

• SET research tends to capture a moment in a couple's relationship rather than tracking their level of satisfaction across time

• If research in this field is to have validity, it should be longitudinal, as relationships are not fixed and stable; they are prone to change and fluctuation for any number of reasons (financial, personal, practical)

• The couples in Utne's research were all newlyweds who had not had time to develop resentments or complaints about the perceived equity of their relationship

  • A follow-up study would have been a useful addition to this research

Bias

• Asking a couple about the state of their relationship is fraught with potential sources of bias

  • Participants may wish to present their relationship in the best possible light (social desirability bias) or they may remember episodes from their relationship through a distorted lens (recall bias/hindsight bias)

  • It is also possible that some participants might report positive feelings about their partner while at the same time thinking negative thoughts about them (cognitive dissonance)