Social Exchange Theory

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
Why do relationships change or end?
Advertisements

Choosing Others: Dating and Mate Selection
Getting Involved Ch Getting Together: The Search for Intimate Possibilities Beginning Where You Are Hanging Out and Hooking Up.
Maintenance of relationships
Bible 101 Dean Biebert, Pastor Shepherd of the Hills Church.
Interdependency How are relationships like economies? What is exchanged? What determines if we’ll stay in our current relationships? Why do some relationships.
Mate Selection Marital Happiness. Divorce Distribution by Length of Marriage 20 to 24 years of age.
RELATIONSHIPS. Filtering Model of Mate Selection Romantic relationships involve 4 fixed stages: –Stage 1: Proximity Filter –Stage 2: Stimulus Filter –Stage.
Exchange Theory Power And Intimate Relationships Exchange Theory Power And Intimate Relationships.
Human Relationships Love. Starter (name the artist/s) “All you need is love” “All you need is love” “A million love songs” “A million love songs” “Love.
Evaluating cultural variations in attachment
M ARRIAGE Definitely! Maybe??? No Way !!!. W HY DO PEOPLE GET M ARRIED ??? Activity: In your groups, create a list of all the reasons you can think of.
Project.  Topic should be: Clear and specific Practical and meaningful, this means the results of your research must have some implications in real life.
Chapter 9 Personal Relationships. Three basic characteristics Frequent interaction over a long period of time Many different kinds of activities Strong.
Why do babies develop attachments? Lesson Four. Starter: The Continuity Hypothesis The types of relationships people have later on in their lives will.
Choices in Relationships Chapter Seven: Mate Selection.
the act or process of communicating; fact of being communicated to.
Copyright © 2010 Pearson Education. All rights reserved. Interpersonal Attraction: From First Impressions to Close Relationships Chapter 10 “Try to reason.
Introduction to Relationships How do relationships start? Factors involved in attraction.
Cognitive and Social Origins of Attraction. Open Gross’s sample chapter on Interpersonal Relationships. Open Gross’s sample chapter on Interpersonal Relationships.
Social Learning Theory Explaining Gender PSYB1. Look through the magazines choose just one person you like and explain why…
Some factors leading to initial attraction Proximity (more likely to form relationships with those who live near us, or that we interact with on a regular.
Relationships Formation Formation Who do we get together with? Who do we get together with? Maintenance Maintenance What keeps relationships going? What.
2. Maintenance of Relationships Key Question – Why do relationships keep going?
 Partners weigh up the inputs and outputs of a relationship to see if it is equitable.  Make a list with your study buddy of inputs and outputs of a.
Summarise what we learned about last lesson… What could be today’s lesson objective? Write an example.
2 x Theories. Using what you learned on Reward/Need Satisfaction Theory from last lesson. Try and find two possible matches from Match.com. Be prepared.
MARRIAGES, INTIMATE RELATIONSHIPS & SOCIETY Unit 3 – Chapter 6.
Interdependence and Equity.  The previous chapter (09) focused primarily on strategies used to keep relationships: ◦1.Satisfying and in good “working.
Problem Solving, Decision Making, Negotiation and Compromise
Social Exchange Theory Professor Tamara S. Arrington University of Kentucky Bluegrass Community and Technical College.
What do the following words mean? Formal socialisation Social control Equality of opportunity Vocationalism Hidden curriculum Meritocracy Starter activity.
Chapter 10 Communicating in Close Relationships. Understanding Close Relationships Role relationships – partners are interdependent while accomplishing.
Warm up - Getting started! In groups of 3 or 4, freeze frame a moment from a rite of passage, for the rest of the class to guess, e-refs for the best examples.
M ARRIAGE Definitely! Maybe??? No Way !!!. W HY DO PEOPLE GET M ARRIED ??? Activity: In your groups, create a list of all the reasons you can think of.
Bowlby – internal working model Early emotional attachment determines later/adult relationships Ainsworth – attachment type Secure = stable, trusting.
Extension: Could gender be an interaction of the different explanations we have looked at so far? Discuss with somebody else whether you think the development.
Journal #1  What quality will you most avoid when choosing a future spouse? Why?
Feedback Overall very well done! Strong commitment to project topic, passion came through Real effort to find relevant literature.
Formation of Romantic Relationships
Role of culture in relationships Role of communication in relationships Why do relationships change or end.
Formation of Romantic Relationships
Theories of Mate Selection
Maintenance and Breakdown of romantic relationships
Maintenance of Relationships
Relationships Theories of Romantic Relationships
The Investment Model Relationships
Evolution & Sexual Selection
Theories of Romantic Relationships: Social Exchange Theory
THEORIES OF RELATIONSHIPS
Theories of Romantic Relationships: Equity Theory
Relationships The story so far
Formation of relationships Matching Hypothesis
Social Exchange Theory
Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult’s investment model
Starter activity What do the following words mean?
Personal Relationships
Identify key terms from definitions
The Matching Hypothesis
Chapter 5 Mate Selection
Formation of Relationships
Power And Intimate Relationships
Lesson Objectives Thinking Ladder…
Social Exchange Theory
What You Need to Know.
Relationships Lesson 1.
Theories of romantic relationships
Welcome to Financial Literacy
Relationships Part 2.
Presentation transcript:

Social Exchange Theory Relationship formation

Starter In pairs, make a list of the benefits and costs of a romantic relationship. We will discuss these in 5 minutes

What did you come up with? Benefits Costs

Social Exchange Theory Thibaut and Kelley,1959. All behaviour is a series of exchanges. Individuals want to maximise rewards and minimise costs. If a relationship is to be successful then both parties are expected to give and take in equal proportions.

Social Exchange Theory(an economic theory) Rewards from relationships are sex, companionship, being cared for etc. People will only form a relationship if the rewards outweigh the costs(in terms of time, effort, finances etc) Thus, commitment to a relationship is dependent on its profitability

Social Exchange Theory Comparison level. The standard against which all our relationships are judged. We get a comparison level through using our own experiences in other relationships together with general views of what we might expect to gain from the relationship. If the benefit of a relationship exceeds the CL we worked out then we would see forming the relationship as beneficial.

Social Exchange Theory Task 1- Take a celebrity couple and write down a list of profit and lost. 2-Work out a comparison level based on the celebrities past relationships and what they have to gain from the relationship. 3-Should they have formed a relationship? Are they still together? Does the SET fit? You have ten minutes.

Celebrity couple examples Met in the Jungle. Peter was a washed up star! Katie was known as a glamour model. They had two children and Peter was a father to her disabled son, Harvey. Katie had bad luck with men, Dwight Yorke, Dane Bowers etc

Celebrity couple examples Met at university. Wills wasn’t sure so dumped poor Kate! Before realising she was the, ‘one’! What benefits might Kate get from marrying a handsome, rich, caring Prince? What benefits would William get?

Evaluation: SET Provide 3 evaluation points of SET. Remember to use key terms discussed in evaluation skills lesson. You have 10 mins

Evaluation SET Strengths Based on Social/economic approach: so people have free will and choice(takes into account individual differences) unlike in other theories of relationship formation , such as Sociobiological. Helps to explain why somebody would terminate a relationship they were satisfied with (in that the alternative partner can offer even more!) It could help explain why people may stay in an abusive relationship (Rasbults, investment model).As if they have put a lot into the relationship and there is no Clalt then they may stay in that relationship.

Evaluation of SET Weaknesses Methodologies used: ,Most studies investigating it are very artificial and lack ecological validity. It has inconsistent empirical research: Clark and Mills (1979) identified two different styles of couples ( communal and exchange couples). In the communal couple they have positive regard for each other and believe over time each will receive equal costs/benefits. The exchange couple are more about here and now.

Evaluation SET Limited applications: Hatfield (1979) found equity was more important for females . Murstein (1977) found that only people in problem marriages will look for alternatives. It assumes that everybody wants equality. Some couples may be perfectly happy to give more than they receive. Cultural bias: SET may only apply to western countries.

Matching Hypothesis Ideally we all want a perfect partner. But as this is not possible we compromise. We are likely to become matched to somebody who most matches what we want. In the real world we chose somebody who is the best we feel we could get!!(in terms of attraction etc)

Research study : Matching Hypothesis The Computer Dance Study (Walster, 1966) 752 students bought welcome week tickets for a computer dance. When they bought the ticket they were told that information they gave about themselves would be fed into a computer and this would provide an, ‘ideal match’ date. In fact they were randomly assigned any partner. When students were giving their data (when they booked thier ticket) an unseen observer marked them on attractiveness. After spending two hours with their dates students were asked how much they liked their partner.

Computer Dance Study Those who were physically attractive were liked the most. Men asked out a partner if they found her attractive ,regardless of how attractive they were. High ecological validity: naturalistic setting. Unexpected results: The study does not support the matching hypothesis. If we match each other then we should only ask somebody out whose level of attractiveness matches our own. Methodological Problems?

Extra reading “ Critically assess explanations relating to the formation of relationships”