Evaluating and Applying Social Exchange Theory to Every Day Interaction Jordan McKoy Rutgers University One of the most commonly used theories in every day interaction is the Social Exchange theory. Introduced in about 1976, it is a widely recognized theory in the field of communication, and is a theory that we can learn and take advice that can be used when interacting in various relationships: work, romantic, plutonic, etc. This paper will attempt to better explain this theory and its relevance to romantic relationships, mainly in more complicated ones such as relationships that involve cheating. I will begin by summarizing the theory and then pointing out key strengths and limitations alike. After that …show more content…
As per class notes, SET explains when and why individuals choose to continue and develop certain personal relationship while simultaneously ending others. Its assumptions include: 1. Relationships are a process of comparing and contrasting benefits and costs to get those benefits 2. People would like to achieve maximum benefits in relationships while lessening the costs, which is called minimax principle 3. By nature humans are selfish beings and tend to look out for self first. The core components of this theory include: 1. Outcome, the ratio of rewards to costs in a given relationship. This means, in the end, will my rewards from this relationship balance out to all of the work I put in? 2. The comparison level of what rewards do I expect to receive from this relationship and this leads to 3. The comparison level of alternatives, which says, if I don’t like the cost to reward ratio, do I have other options? Because of these assumptions and core components, the predictions of this theory are that if the outcome is greater than the comparison level, one is satisfied. If the outcome is less than the comparison level, one is dissatisfied. It the outcome is greater than the comparison level alternative, one stays and if it isn’t the relationship is …show more content…
After brief summary, I noted two strengths of this theory are the fact that it is both scientific and humanistic. It has key limitations that include not paying attention to cultural context and that it is a materialistic theory that does not view love as enough of a reward for relationships. This theory has clear implications that people will always seek a relationship that is more beneficial to them than what it will cost them. Whether it is romantic, plutonic, familial, or work related, relationships will most likely only be entered if deemed mostly beneficial, according to