1  

Emily Kuecker SpCm 605

Social Exchange Theory December 6, 2011

People are continuously weighing the rewards and costs of social interactions and

relationships. Anyone involved in the relationship is affected by any minor decision.

Assessing relational interactions regarding self-interests is the theme of this chapter’s

interpersonal communication theory of social exchange.

Throughout this chapter, the reader will explore social exchange theory’s origin,

assumptions, Comparison Levels, and Comparison Levels for Alternatives. After the

reader develops an understanding of the theory, then he or she will apply their knowledge

to a television interview featuring Alexis Stewart’s book, Whateverland.

Social exchange theory emerged in the early 1960s when scholars attempted to

predict and explain a person’s behavior when there was a projected reward or cost

(Thibaut & Kelley, 1959; Homans, 1961; Blau, 1964; Chibucos; 2004; Stafford, 2008).

Rewards are classified as bringing pleasure and satisfaction, whereas costs are perceived

as a loss or punishment (Wang, 2004). The scholars focused on how an individual would

fend for his or herself when involved in a relationship. As the scholars continued to

investigate, they noticed that economic exchange and social exchange theory both

contained reward and cost situations. Therefore, social exchange theory was nicknamed

an economic metaphor (Chibucos, 2004).

Social exchange theory uses a relational cost-benefit analysis and Comparison

Levels to determine the overall worth of a particular relationship by subtracting the costs

from the rewards (Stafford, 2008). People are continually trying to protect their self-

interests, which has classified humans as selfish by nature. Their self-interests drive

  2  

them to act in accordance with what they believe will bring the most rewards or benefits

(Lawler & Thye, 2007). Therefore, people are constantly trying to maximize their

benefits while minimizing any negative cost (Wang, 2004).

After an individual has analyzed the costs and rewards, then he or she will

determine their satisfaction in the relationship. Since every person has a different level of

satisfaction, each situation needs to be examined separately. Using the Comparison

Levels, an individual will decide if his or her expectations of the relationship meet the

actual relationship’s characteristic. If an individual feels the rewards are greater than the

costs, than the person will feel satisfied with the relationship. On the contrary, if an

individual feels there are more costs associated with the relationship, the individual may

feel dissatisfied (Stafford, 2008).

After an individual decides on their level of satisfaction, he or she will use the

Comparison Level for Alternatives to determine if current their relationship is the most

beneficial for them. According to Roloff (1981), Comparison Level for Alternatives is

when an individual decides what the “lowest level of relational rewards they will be

willing to accept when given available rewards from alternative relationships or being

alone” (p. 48). If a current relationship provides more positive aspects than negative

aspects, than an individual may decide to continue their current relationship. However, if

another situation appears to be more promising, than the individual may terminate their

current relationship and pursue a different one (Stafford, 2008).

Now that solid groundwork for social exchange theory has been laid, the reader

can now apply the theory to the Stewart family. Martha Stewart is a well-known

American businesswoman, who has cultivated her image to create flawless home décor

  3  

and delicious kitchen treats. It has taken her years to form this reputation; however,

Martha’s daughter, Alexis, has recently been using her famous mother to advance her

own career. Alexis has co-hosted, Whatever, Martha!, a television talk show that pokes

fun of Martha’s anal behavior of creating the perfect item (Stableford, 2011). Yet, Alexis

did not stop the teasing with the television talk show. In October 2011, Alexis released a

non-self help book, Whateverland. The book gives an uncensored glimpse into the

Stewart family’s private life. During the TODAY Show, the interviewer highlighted

quotes from the book that painted a very different picture of the typical perfect Martha.

Alexis claimed the media had taken the quotes out of context. For every misinterpreted

quote, Alexis had a rebuttal to clear the bad image the family was beginning to form from

Whateverland (Bell, 2011).

Martha’s reaction could have been either negative or positive towards the

situation, as well as been detrimental or beneficial for her career. Surprisingly, Martha

endorsed Alexis’s book. At first glance Martha’s behavior may have seemed fake, but

when the scenario was analyzed with social exchange theory everything added up for a

grand reward.

When Martha weighed the rewards and costs of her relationship with Alexis, she

realized the rewards were greater than any costs. According to Stafford (2008),

sometimes individuals use their personal self-interests to make others “act in accordance

with perceptions and projects of the rewards and costs associated with an exchange” (p.

378). Therefore, Martha demonstrated to the public that she could maintain her perfect

image by supporting Alexis. This benefited Martha’s image because it did not contradict

the reputation the public had previously known. Yet, the public does not know if Martha

  4  

was completely satisfied with the book or relationship. The public can assume that

Martha is satisfied because she is remaining in the mother-daughter relationship and not

pursuing a different form of relationship with Alexis

The reader can now understand how social interactions are strengthened and

deteriorate after learning about social exchange theory and applying it to a mother-

daughter relationship. The Stewart’s scenario could have had many different endings

because of various external factors. Nevertheless, Martha and Alexis both realized there

were more positive aspects in this relationship. Now they are benefiting from working

out the flaws and have developed a career relationship.

  5  

References

Bell, J. (Producer). (2011, October 24). Martha Stewart’s daughter embraces

imperfection. NBC TODAY Show [Television broadcast]. New York, NY: NBC

Studios.

Blau, P. (1964). Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley & Sons.

Chibucos. (2004). Social exchange theory. Retrieved from

http://www.sagepub.com/upm-data/4993_Chibucos_Chapter_5.pdf

Homans, G. (1961). Social behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace & World.

Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. (2007). Social exchange of emotions. In J. E. Stets, & J. H.

Turner (Eds.). Handbook of the sociology of emotions (pp. 294-303). New York,

NY: Springer Science + Business Media.

Roloff, M. E. (1981). Interpersonal communication: Theoretical exchange approach.

Beverly Hills, CA: Sage Publications.

Stableford, D. (2011, October 24). Martha Stewart never pointed a glue gun at my head,

daughter says. The Cutline. Retrieved from

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/cutline/martha-stewart-responds-daughter-book-

claims-she-had-160622109.html

Stafford, L. (2008). Social exchange theories: Calculating the rewards and costs of

personal relationships. In L. A. Baxter, & D. O. Braithwaite (Eds.). Engaging

theories in interpersonal communication: Multiple perspectives (pp. 295-307).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Productions, Inc.

Thibaut, J. W., & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York,

NY: John Wiley & Sons.

  6  

Wang, E. (2004, November 6). Social exchange theory applied to romantic relationships.

Retrieved from http://web.mit.edu/wangfire/pub9.00/essay3.pdf