Formation of Romantic Relationships Psychological Explanation 2: Freud's Psychodynamic Theory Formation of Romantic Relationships First Explanation: Social Exchange Theory Y13 Schizophrenia with BPA

Social Exchange Theory (AO1) SET is an economic theory which assumes that romantic (and other) relationships can be understood in terms of an exchange of rewards and costs Examples of Rewards include money, status, information, sex / affection Examples of Costs include time, energy, financial investment, monogamy and the risk of missing out on other romances

Social Exchange Theory (AO1) Formation of a relationship between two individuals is thought to begin when they ‘weigh up’ the potential rewards and costs of being involved with someone If the rewards exceed the costs then the potential partnership is seen as being profitable and formation occurs Individuals try to maximise their rewards and minimise their costs by changing their and others behaviour

Social Exchange Theory George Homans (1961) “We are all in relationships for profit”

Social Exchange Theory (AO1) Thibaut & Kelley 1959 proposed a 4 stages to SET: Sampling: you check out rewards and costs across a spectrum of potential relationships Bargaining: Set out initial position, negotiate costs (time & effort etc) & explore potential rewards (sex, money etc) to test if a deeper relationship will be worthwhile Commitment: Become ‘settled in’ and rewards / costs are predictable and regularised Institutionalisation: Norms established, mutual expectations in place, each knows now how to minimise cost & maximise reward

Social Exchange Theory (AO1) The Comparison Level The Comparison Level (CL) helps us to decide if forming a new relationship would be worthwhile It involves the scrutiny of previous and other peoples relationships against what we might expect from the potential exchange being considered In this way the individual can judge if the situation warrants forming a r’ship with the potential partner, It’s like: How might it compare to my previous relationships? Is the potential profit likely to be higher than I am accustomed?

Social Exchange Theory (AO1) The Comparison Level for Alternatives The Comparison Level for alternatives (CLa) involves comparison of one’s current relationship with other potential partners with whom we might form a relationship. If profit levels in the potential new relationship are higher, one might end current r’ship in order to form a new one. However this includes consideration of possible costs incurred in leaving current partner, eg. Less access to children, less money, no house to live in etc. If these costs are too high the new relationship may not form

Social Exchange Theory (+AO2) Rusbult (1995) said SET has some explanatory power, eg. Explains why women remain in abusive relationships (high cost of being abused outweighed by rewards such as children, money, house so ends up being unprofitable to divorce) SET can be applied to various different sorts of relationship, eg. Family, romantic, workplace etc Behavioural Theory supports SET as we know that rewards encourage behaviours to continue through reinforcement, in this case the behaviour is seeing the person again and forming a relationship

Social Exchange Theory (-AO2) Waller (1951) suggested that SET doesn’t take account of important sex differences in reward / cost priorities He studies couples who were at University and found differences in what costs / rewards were important to men / women: Men  financial & emotional investment (cost) for physical affection (reward) Women  sexual investment (cost) to gain attention and commitment (reward) *Main focus of his research: The person who has the least interest in continuing a relationship is able to control the relationship and exploit the other partner

Social Exchange Theory (-AO2) Assumes humans act rationally when deciding on whether to form a relationship with someone, clinically keeping track and weighing up costs & rewards etc Doesn’t take account of individual differences in our approach to relationships, which may depend on our personality and unique tastes etc, eg is lots of sex seen as a reward or a cost Sees us as being motivated by selfish concerns, thus probably more applicable to individualistic cultures (eg. UK, USA) than collectivistic ones (eg. Far East). Thus is a bit culturally-biased.

Social Exchange Theory (-AO2) Aaronson (1965) found that increases in reward were more important than constant reward Feeney (2001) found that the theory fails to consider the variance in contexts in which relationships occur in modern times, eg. Different social contexts from 1960 such as texting and social networking Some research suggests that a balance in rewards is more important than max profit. Hence the development of Equity Theory