Which Of These Assertions About Social Exchange Theory Is Baseless?

Unless the relationship is an example of consummate love, people will be dissatisfied if Social Exchange Theory results in more costs than benefits.

Society refers to the collective of human beings in which we find ourselves immersed. Social exchange theory will provide light on which of the following statements is incorrect regarding social exchange theory.

Or how these interactions influence one another’s actions. Regarding the Social Exchange Theory hypothesis, claim B is false. The remaining claims are also true.

To Begin, Let’s Define Social Exchange Theory:

According to social exchange theory, which has its roots in economics, the social behavior of two parties interacting after each has performed a cost-benefit analysis to weigh the pros and cons of the situation is what sociologists and psychologists study.

The idea also encompasses monetary exchanges the cost-benefit analysis takes place when both parties own resources that are of value to the other.

According to the idea of social exchange, people make these kinds of calculations in all kinds of relationships, from romantic ones to platonic ones to professional ones to even fleeting ones like the one you would have with a client while working a cash register.

According to social exchange theory, a relationship may be ended or abandoned if the costs exceed the benefits, such as when one person puts a lot of time or money into the relationship but receives little in return.

Humans focused their research on dyadic exchange even though other forms of interaction are possible.

Within the Social Exchange Theory, John Thibaut and Harold Kelley are famous for their emphasis on the dyad and the small group as psychological notions.

Lévi-Strauss is often credited with laying the groundwork for this theoretical approach via his research in anthropology on generalized transaction systems like family and gift-giving.

Various Researchers Present Their Hypotheses on Describing the Fact of Which of the Following Statements Is Incorrect Regarding Social Exchange Theory?

The hypothesis of Thibaut and Kelley: Small groups based on dyadic ties are the foundation of Thibaut and Kelley’s idea. Using the reward-cost matrices developed in Game Theory, they identified indicators of dependency between people, such as the strength of a party over another (or “correspondence” against “no correspondence”) of outcomes.

They also imply that one’s actions in a relationship might have a decisive impact on the results that person experiences.

By analyzing the dynamics of power in a given situation, they could foretell how social interaction may develop.

They also conducted tests to see whether or not a person’s attraction to partnerships is determined by the results they obtain in such relationships.

To Get All Types of News: newsawares.com 

Humans: The ideas of equivalence, expectation, and distributive fairness in the dyadic transaction were the cornerstones of Homans’s theory.

By doing so, he hopes to provide light on the dynamics of small-group interactions and the returns on such investments. Success, stimuli, and the deprivation-satiation thesis are Humans’ three-pronged summary of the system.

The success hypothesis states that people are more likely to repeat an activity if they get positive reinforcement for doing that action.

The frequency with which a given stimulus has been followed by a favorable outcome in the past has a direct correlation with the likelihood that it will be noticed and acted upon.

According to the principle of deprivation and satiation, the value of a reward decreases as its frequency of receipt increases.

Blau: It’s clear that Blau’s idea is heavily influenced by Homans. Nonetheless, he employs a greater number of economic words, and the book’s central premise is that social structure emerges primarily via the patterns of trading that occur between very small groups of people.

He examines the evolution of exchange theory in economics without focusing on its psychological assumptions. He helped develop the concept of drawing lines between monetary and political transactions.

 His theory sought to distinguish between simple and complicated processes while still taking emergent qualities into account, and Belau’s utilitarian bent prompted theorists to consider the potential benefits of future interactions.

Blau was concerned that students would neglect to understand the growing facets of social interchange if they concentrated too much on the psychological principles inside the Social Exchange Theory. While Humans focused more on the psychology of instrumental conduct, Blau stressed technical economic analysis.

Emerson: The work of Homans and Blau influenced Emerson. When speaking about people and groups, he zeroed emphasis on their connections and dynamics.

He sees resource scarcity, power imbalances, and reliance as the driving forces behind social trade. He believed that relationships may be structured differently based on the kind and quantity of the resources being transferred from one party to another.

In his view, a couple is defined primarily by their respective positions of power and reliance. It is important to note that Emerson does not consider Exchange to be a theory,

but rather a framework from which other theories might converge and be contrasted to structural functionalism. Emerson shared Blau’s point of view in that both of them emphasized the importance of power in the trading process.

Lévi-Strauss: An anthropologist bases their theory on the idea that people act in trade relationships. As an anthropologist whose research centered on extended exchange systems like family and gift systems, he is often credited with helping to develop this theoretical paradigm.

It was Mauss’s research that served as the basis for his family tree diagrams. Generalized trade, as proposed by Levi-Strauss, operates through indirect forms of reciprocity

Also Visit: What shade were Elvis Presley’s eyes