Social exchange theory

Sociology
Portal
Theory · History
Research methods
Topics · Subfields
Categories · Lists

Social exchange theory is a social psychological and sociological perspective that explains social change and stability as a process of negotiated exchanges between parties. Social exchange theory posits that all human relationships are formed by the use of a subjective cost-benefit analysis and the comparison of alternatives. The theory has roots in economics, psychology and sociology.

Social exchange theory features many of the main assumptions found in rational choice theory and structuralism.

Contents

Basic Concepts

[1]·Costs are the elements of relational life that have negative value to a person, such as the effort put into a relationship and the negatives of a partner.

(Costs can be time, money, effort etc.)

·Rewards are the elements of a relationship that have positive value.

(Rewards can be sense of acceptance, support, and companionship etc.)

The Social Exchange perspective argues that people calculate the overall worth of a particular relationship by subtracting its costs from the rewards it provides. [2]

Worth = Rewards – Costs

If worth is a positive number, it is positive relationship. On the contrary, negative number indicates a negative relationship.

The worth of a relationship influences its outcome, or whether people will continue with a relationship or terminate it.

Positive relationships are expected to endure, whereas negative relationships will probably terminate.

According to Laura Stafford (2008), economic exchanges and social exchanges have some differences: Social exchanges involve a connection with another person; social exchanges involve trust, not legal obligations; social exchanges are more flexible; and social exchanges rarely involve explicit bargaining.[3]

“the guiding force of interpersonal relationships is the advancement of both parties’ self-interest” —— Michael Roloff (1981) [4]

Social Exchange Theory posits that the major force in interpersonal relationships is the satisfaction of both people’s self-interest. Self-interest is not considered necessarily bad and can be used to enhance relationships. Interpersonal exchanges are thought to be analogous to economic exchanges where people are satisfied when they receive a fair return for their expenditures.

Benefits include things such as material or financial gains, social status, and emotional comforts. Costs generally consist of sacrifices of time, money, or lost opportunities. Outcome is defined to be the difference between the benefits and the costs:

\text {OUTCOME} = \text {BENEFITS} - \text {COSTS}

Note that because individuals have different expectations of relationships, an individual's satisfaction with a relationship depends on more than just the outcome. For any two people with the same outcome, their level of satisfaction may differ based on their expectations. One person may not expect very large outcomes, and therefore would be more easily satisfied in relationships than someone who expects more. This notion of satisfaction is formalized as the difference between the outcome and the comparison level:

\text {SATISFACTION} = \text {OUTCOME} - \text {COMPARISON LEVEL}

That is to say, there are people who stay in unhappy relationships as well as those who leave happy relationships. What determines whether an individual stays in a relationship or leaves is the set of alternate relationships available. If there are many alternatives available to an individual, then that individual is less dependent on the relationship. This notion of dependence is formalized as the difference between the outcome and the "comparison level of alternatives":

\text {DEPENDENCE} = \text {OUTCOME} - \text {COMPARISON LEVEL OF ALTERNATIVES}

Note that the set of potential alternatives can be governed both by extrinsic and intrinsic factors. An example of an extrinsic factor would be that the person is from a sparsely populated town, and an example of an intrinsic factor would be that a person is very shy about meeting new people. Both intrinsic and extrinsic factors affect the set of people available to an individual for forming an alternate relationship, and thus affect the level of dependence of the individual on his or her current relationship.

When deciding whether to leave the relationship, an individual considers the alternatives. There are other considerations, such as the barriers to leaving the relationship. Such barriers include things such as avoiding a fight, dealing with a shared financial account, etc. There are also considerations of the investments that an individual has made in the relationship. For instance, a couple that has spent many years together have invested a lot of time into a relationship, and this must be weighted against the benefits gained from an alternative relationships.

Assumptions

[5]The assumptions that SET makes about human nature include the following:

·Humans seek rewards and avoid punishments.

·Humans are rational beings.

·The standards that humans use to evaluate costs and rewards vary over time and from person to person.

The Prisoner’s Dilemma is a widely used example in game theory that attempts to illustrate why or how two individuals may not cooperate with each other, even if it is in their best interest to do so. Basically, the Prisoner’s Dilemma goes like this: two people are arrested for a crime, but there isn’t enough evidence to outright convict one person or the other.[6]

It is developed by Thibaut and Kelley to illustrate their first assumption.

Two Major Parts

Social exchange includes "both a notion of a relationship, and some notion of a shared obligation in which both parties perceive responsibilities to each other"[7]

Evaluation rests on two types of comparisons: Comparison Level and Comparison Level for Alternative.

The Comparison Level (CL) is a standard representing what people fell they should receive in the way of rewards and costs from a particular relationship. (Thibaut and Kelly)

The Comparison Level for Alternative (CLalt) refers to “the lowest level of relational rewards a person is willing to accept given available rewards from alternative relationships or being alone” [8]

According to Kelly and Thibaut, people engage in Behavioral Sequence, or a series of actions designed to achieve their goal. When people engage in these behavioral sequences they are dependent to some extent on their relational partner.

Fate control is the ability to affect a partner’s outcomes.

Behavior control is the power to cause another’s behavior to change by changing one’s own behavior.

Humans seek rewards and avoid punishments.

·Humans are rational beings.

·The standards that humans use to evaluate costs and rewards vary over time and from person to person.

The assumptions SET makes about the nature of relationships include the following:

·Relationships are interdependent.

·Relational life is a process.

People develop patterns of exchange to cope with power differentials and to deal with the costs associated with exercising power. These patterns describe behavioral rules or norms that indicate how people trade resources in an attempt to maximize rewards and minimize costs. Three different matrices have been described by Thibaut and Kelly to illustrate the patterns people develop. These are given matrix, the effective matrix and the dispositional matrix.

·the given matrix represents the behavioral choices and outcomes that are determined by a combination of external factors (environment) and internal factors（the specific skills each interactant possesses）

·the effective matrix “which represents an expansion of alternative behaviors and/or outcomes which ultimately determines the behavioral choices in social exchange” [9]

·the dispositional matrix represents the way two people believe that rewards ought to be exchanged between them.

There are three forms within these matrices.

In a direct exchange, reciprocation is confined to the two actors. One social actor provides value to another one and the other reciprocates.

A generalized exchange involves indirect reciprocity. One person gives to another and the recipient the recipient responds but not to the first person.

Productive exchange means that both actors have to contribute for either one of them to benefit. Both people incur benefits and costs simultaneously.

Critiques

Katherine Miller outlines several major objections to or problems with the social exchange theory as developed from early seminal works [10]

It also is strongly seated in an individualist mindset, which may limit its application in and description of collectivist cultures.

Applications

Currently, Social Exchange Theory materializes in many different situations with the same idea of the exchange of resources. Homan's once summarized the theory by stating:

Social behavior is an exchange of goods, material goods but also non-material ones, such as the symbols of approval or prestige. Persons that give much to others try to get much from them, and persons that get much from others are under pressure to give much to them. This process of influence tends to work out at equilibrium to a balance in the exchanges. For a person in an exchange, what he gives may be a cost to him, just as what he gets may be a reward, and his behavior changes less as the difference of the two, profit, tends to a maximum ("Theories Used in Research").

Other applications that developed include fields such as anthropology, as evidenced in an article by Harumi Befu, which discusses cultural and social ideas and norms such as gift-giving and marriage.

See also

References

  1. ^ West, Richard; Turner, Lynn (2007). Introducing Communication Theory. McGraw Hill. pp. 186–187. 
  2. ^ P.R., Monge; N., Contractor (2003). Theories of communicaton networks. Oxford University Press. 
  3. ^ Standford, Laura (2008). Social Exchange theories. In L.A. Baxter & D.O. Braithwaite(Eds.), Engaging theories in interpersonal communication:Multiple perspetives(pp.377-389). Thousand Oaks. 
  4. ^ Roloff, Michael (1981). Interpersonal communication； The social exchange approach. Beverly Hills. 
  5. ^ West, Richard; Turner, Lynn (2007). Introducing Communication Theory. McGraw Hill. pp. 188. 
  6. ^ Thibaut, N.; Kelley, H. (1959). The social psychology of groups.. New York Wiley. 
  7. ^ Lavelle, Rupp; Brockner, J. (2007). Taking a multifoci approach to the study of justice, social exchange, and citizenship behavior:The target similarity model.. Journal of Management. pp. 845. 
  8. ^ Roloff, Michael (1981). Interpersonal communication； The social exchange approach. Beverly Hills. pp. 48. 
  9. ^ Roloff, Michael (1981). Interpersonal communication； The social exchange approach. Beverly Hills. pp. 51. 
  10. ^ Katherine, Miller (2005). Communication Theories. McGraw Hill. 

Additional Reading

External links