3.3 Social Exchange Theories

Costs vs. Rewards.

Originated from psychology, sociology, economics. Analogous to economic exchange. Under the post-positivist paradigm.

Definitions:

  • An exchange is “a transfer of something in return for something else” (Leffler and Roloff 1982)
  • Social exchange is the result of human’s connection.
Aspect Social Exchange Economic Exchange
Reliance Trust, goodwill, voluntary Legal Obligations
Rewards and Costs Open Exact Specifications for both parties
Time frame Continuous Set, fixed for the exchange to occur
Type Unique, individualized Similar from person to person

Goals:

  • Predict and explain behaviors.

Assumptions:

  • Social behavior is a series of transactions.
  • “Individuals attempt to maximize their rewards and minimize their costs.”
  • After receiving rewards, people feel a sense of obligation.

Concepts:

  • Self-interests: “individuals to act in accordance with perceptions and projections of rewards and costs associated with an exchange, or potential exchange, of resources.” we are motivated to serve self-interests.
  • Interdependence: “the extent to which one person’s outcomes depend on another person’s outcomes”

Social Exchange in Communication:

  • communication is a communication tool
  • communication is the resource to be exchange (i.e., either reward or cost).
  • Exchange may have symbolic or communication value (Molm, Schaefer, and Collett 2007)

Evaluation:

  • love can be selfless: Altruism is beyond social exchange
  • High in exchange orientation are likely to keep score (Murstein 1971)
  • Cultures differ in their exchange orientations: exchange orientation is more expected in individualistic and capitalistic societies. (Yperen and Buunk 1990)
  • People are not also rational (scale of inequity is not always instantly balanced)

Application:

  • emotional health (individual), trusting one’s spouse (interpersonal), and feeling underbenefited in the relationship (interpersonal) significantly predict marital well-being for both groups of women (i.e., African American and European American). While physical health (individual) and in-law relations (social and economic) showed significant influence for only African American (Goodwin 2003).

3.3.1 Resource Theory

“Resources constitute rewards when they provide pleasure and costs when they provoke pain, anxiety, embarrassment, or mental and physical effort.”

Developed by (Foa and Foa 1980, 2012)

Types of resources:

  • Money: universal
  • Goods
  • Status
  • Love
  • Services
  • Information

Exchange of similar resources results in more satisfaction (Foa and Foa 1980). And relationship type influences the exchange of resources.

3.3.2 Interdependence Theory

Individuals assess their rewards in a relationship based on

  • Comparison levels: what one should receive: “the standard an individual uses to judge how attractive or satisfactory a particular relationship is.” Relate to normative economics
  • Alternatives (Comparison levels of alternatives): what one could receive: “the lowest level of rewards deemed acceptable when considering possible alternative relationship.”

Note:

  • Our projection is not always right. For example, the more committed and invested we are in a relationship, the more likely we are to downplay alternatives (Rusbult and Agnew 2010)

Application:

  • (Vangelisti, Middleton, and Ebersole 2013): correlation between individuals’ cognition and their relational satisfaction. Individuals’ vocalized thoughts correlate with their partner’s satisfaction.
  • equity and satisfaction (under the interdependence theory ) influences one’s relational maintenance strategies (Stafford and Canary 2006)

3.3.3 Equity Theory

We also consider fairness in our equation of gains and costs, where fairness is “equity in the distribution of costs and rewards”(L. Baxter and Braithwaite 2008).

Distributive justice (Adams 1965): “people think and act so that rewards are distributed in accordance with their effort.” Three types of inequity:

  • ratio of your rewards to costs in vs. others’ ratios.
  • “the exchange relationship you and your partner have with a third entity”
  • your relationship vs others in similar situation.

Inequity leads to emotional distress (Sprecher 2001). Underbenefitied experiences anger, whereas overbenefited experiences guilt. To balance our inequity, we change outcomes (perceptions), or inputs (actions)

Application:

  • Perceptions of equity influences caregiver burnout, and positive caregiver experiences (Ybema et al. 2002)

References

Adams, J. Stacy. 1965. “Inequity in Social Exchange.” In Advances in Experimental Social Psychology, 267–99. Elsevier. https://doi.org/10.1016/s0065-2601(08)60108-2.
Baxter, Leslie, and Dawn Braithwaite. 2008. Engaging Theories in Interpersonal Communication: Multiple Perspectives. SAGE Publications, Inc. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781483329529.
Foa, Edna B., and Uriel G. Foa. 1980. “Resource Theory.” In Social Exchange, 77–94. Springer US. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4613-3087-5_4.
———. 2012. “Resource Theory of Social Exchange.” In Handbook of Social Resource Theory, 15–32. Springer New York. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4614-4175-5_2.
Goodwin, Paula Y. 2003. “African American and European American Womens Marital Well-Being.” Journal of Marriage and Family 65 (3): 550–60. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-3737.2003.00550.x.
Leffler, Ann, and Michael E. Roloff. 1982. “Interpersonal Communication: The Social Exchange Approach.” Contemporary Sociology 11 (6): 718. https://doi.org/10.2307/2068564.
Molm, Linda D., David R. Schaefer, and Jessica L. Collett. 2007. “The Value of Reciprocity.” Social Psychology Quarterly 70 (2): 199–217. https://doi.org/10.1177/019027250707000208.
Murstein, B. K. 1971. “A Theory of Marital Choice and Its Applicability to Marriage Adjustment.” In Theories of Attraction and Love, 100–151. New York,NY: Springer.
Rusbult, Caryl E., and Christopher R. Agnew. 2010. “Prosocial Motivation and Behavior in Close Relationships.” In Prosocial Motives, Emotions, and Behavior: The Better Angels of Our Nature., 327–45. American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/12061-017.
Sprecher, Susan. 2001. “A Comparison of Emotional Consequences of and Changes in Equity over Time Using Global and Domain-Specific Measures of Equity.” Journal of Social and Personal Relationships 18 (4): 477–501. https://doi.org/10.1177/0265407501184003.
Stafford, Laura, and Daniel J. Canary. 2006. “Equity and Interdependence as Predictors of Relational Maintenance Strategies.” Journal of Family Communication 6 (4): 227–54. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15327698jfc0604_1.
Vangelisti, Anita L., Ashley V. Middleton, and Diana S. Ebersole. 2013. “Couples Online Cognitions During Conflict: Links Between What Partners Think and Their Relational Satisfaction.” Communication Monographs 80 (2): 125–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/03637751.2013.775698.
Ybema, Jan F., Roeline G. Kuijer, Marit Hagedoorn, and Bram P. Buunk. 2002. “Caregiver Burnout Among Intimate Partners of Patients with a Severe Illness: An Equity Perspective.” Personal Relationships 9 (1): 73–88. https://doi.org/10.1111/1475-6811.00005.
Yperen, Nico W. Van, and Bram P. Buunk. 1990. “A Longitudinal Study of Equity and Satisfaction in Intimate Relationships.” European Journal of Social Psychology 20 (4): 287–309. https://doi.org/10.1002/ejsp.2420200403.