Outline and evaluate the social exchange theory of romantic relationships.
Thiabult and Kelley proposed the social exchange theory which states relationships are formed as a
result of an exchange process. According to this theory individuals weigh costs and benefits to see
whether a relationships is worth continuing. Partners are motivated to minimise the costs to
themselves while maximising the rewards. Costs involve things which are negative to individuals, so
it could be time, money and effort. Benefits are positive things to the individuals such as sex, praise
and companionship.
Two ways in which we measure profit and loss in romantic relationships, comparison level (CL) and
comparison level of alternatives (CLalt). CL is the amount of reward you believe you deserve and is
influenced by social expectations and past experiences. For example your previous partner loving
your CL for next relationship high in terms of affection, low-self esteem people have low CL satisfied
in gaining lower profit than those with high self-esteem. Whereas CLalt involves considering whether
we might gain more rewards and endure fewer costs in an alternative relationship than the current.
When outcomes exceed those available in current relationships the greater the likelihood the
individual would leave the relationship.
Thibault and Kelley suggested 4 stages in the development of relationships in terms of the social
exchange theory. Sampling- Analysing potential costs, benefits before entering a relationship.
Bargaining occurs at the start of the relationship, partners exchange cost and rewards and test
whether the relationship is worthwhile. Commitment, where relationships become more stable and
costs decrease and rewards increase. Institutionalisation, when partners become settled because the
norm of the relationship is settled and expectation of specific rewards costs for relationship success.
A strength of the social exchange theory is that it can explain why some women choose to remain in
abusive relationships. For example Rusbult found that women consider a cost and benefits ratio
analysis when they are with abusive partners. The high cost of being abused are outweighed by
rewards such as money or child support and so being divorced is not profitable in that situation.
Therefore this matter because it does consider relationships which may be difficult to explain
otherwise and so the theory does have face validity.
A limitation of the social exchange theory is it over emphasizes the importance of comparison levels.
For example Utne et al found that couples were more satisfied with their relationship when they
considered it to be equitable rather than those who thought their relationships was over/under
benefiting for them, supporting the equity theory. Therefore this matters because it suggests equity
is an important factor in relationships rather than costs and benefits, limiting the significance of the
social exchange theory.
Another limitation of the social exchange theory is that the concepts are difficult to operationalise.
For example when considering costs and benefits in a relationship, some may be quantifiable
however some psychological concepts are more difficult to define. The theory also poses other
problems such as how to balance costs and benefits. Thus this matters because not all concepts can
be measured accurately and so affects the reliability of the theory.
Thiabult and Kelley proposed the social exchange theory which states relationships are formed as a
result of an exchange process. According to this theory individuals weigh costs and benefits to see
whether a relationships is worth continuing. Partners are motivated to minimise the costs to
themselves while maximising the rewards. Costs involve things which are negative to individuals, so
it could be time, money and effort. Benefits are positive things to the individuals such as sex, praise
and companionship.
Two ways in which we measure profit and loss in romantic relationships, comparison level (CL) and
comparison level of alternatives (CLalt). CL is the amount of reward you believe you deserve and is
influenced by social expectations and past experiences. For example your previous partner loving
your CL for next relationship high in terms of affection, low-self esteem people have low CL satisfied
in gaining lower profit than those with high self-esteem. Whereas CLalt involves considering whether
we might gain more rewards and endure fewer costs in an alternative relationship than the current.
When outcomes exceed those available in current relationships the greater the likelihood the
individual would leave the relationship.
Thibault and Kelley suggested 4 stages in the development of relationships in terms of the social
exchange theory. Sampling- Analysing potential costs, benefits before entering a relationship.
Bargaining occurs at the start of the relationship, partners exchange cost and rewards and test
whether the relationship is worthwhile. Commitment, where relationships become more stable and
costs decrease and rewards increase. Institutionalisation, when partners become settled because the
norm of the relationship is settled and expectation of specific rewards costs for relationship success.
A strength of the social exchange theory is that it can explain why some women choose to remain in
abusive relationships. For example Rusbult found that women consider a cost and benefits ratio
analysis when they are with abusive partners. The high cost of being abused are outweighed by
rewards such as money or child support and so being divorced is not profitable in that situation.
Therefore this matter because it does consider relationships which may be difficult to explain
otherwise and so the theory does have face validity.
A limitation of the social exchange theory is it over emphasizes the importance of comparison levels.
For example Utne et al found that couples were more satisfied with their relationship when they
considered it to be equitable rather than those who thought their relationships was over/under
benefiting for them, supporting the equity theory. Therefore this matters because it suggests equity
is an important factor in relationships rather than costs and benefits, limiting the significance of the
social exchange theory.
Another limitation of the social exchange theory is that the concepts are difficult to operationalise.
For example when considering costs and benefits in a relationship, some may be quantifiable
however some psychological concepts are more difficult to define. The theory also poses other
problems such as how to balance costs and benefits. Thus this matters because not all concepts can
be measured accurately and so affects the reliability of the theory.
