AQA Syllabus focus:
'Theories of romantic relationships, including social exchange theory.'
Social exchange theory views romantic relationships as a series of exchanges in which people seek maximum rewards and minimum costs, using personal standards and possible alternatives to judge satisfaction and stability.
Social exchange theory: a theory proposing that people assess romantic relationships in terms of rewards, costs, and overall profit, and stay in them when they seem worthwhile.
Core idea
Social exchange theory was developed by Thibaut and Kelley. It assumes that romantic relationships are shaped by a process similar to economic decision-making. People try to get the best possible outcome from a relationship, so they weigh what they gain against what they lose. This does not mean people make exact calculations, but it does mean they are thought to judge whether a relationship feels beneficial overall.
In this theory, people are motivated to maximize rewards and minimize costs.
This visual metaphor depicts the balancing process implied by social exchange theory: partners evaluate whether what they receive is worth what they give up. Used alongside the text, it reinforces the idea that continuation is more likely when perceived benefits outweigh perceived drawbacks. Source
If the balance is favorable, the relationship is likely to continue. If the balance is unfavorable, dissatisfaction is more likely.
Rewards, costs, and profit
In social exchange theory, rewards are any benefits a person receives from a relationship. These might include:
emotional support
companionship
sexual satisfaction
shared resources
increased social status
Costs are negative aspects of the relationship, such as:
time and effort
conflict and arguments
financial strain
stress
loss of freedom
The difference between rewards and costs is called profit.
This diagram represents the core social exchange assumption that relationship outcomes can be understood by weighing rewards against costs. It helps students visualize how a relationship can feel “profitable” (rewards outweigh costs) or “unprofitable” (costs outweigh rewards), supporting judgments about satisfaction and continuation. Source
A relationship with high rewards and low costs is seen as profitable. A relationship with many costs and few rewards is likely to be judged negatively.
A major strength of the theory is that it explains why people may feel differently about similar relationships. The same event can be a reward for one person and a cost for another, depending on their values, expectations, and circumstances.
Comparison level and comparison level for alternatives
People do not judge relationships only by current rewards and costs. They also compare them with personal standards and other possibilities.
When comparison level is first considered, it refers to the standard against which a person judges whether a relationship is worthwhile.
Comparison level: a person’s judgment of what they believe they deserve from a relationship, based on past experiences and social norms.
If the relationship gives more than this expected level, the person is likely to feel satisfied. If it gives less, dissatisfaction is more likely. Comparison level is shaped by previous relationships, observing other couples, and cultural ideas about what relationships should be like.
Another judgment involves whether a better option seems available. This is called comparison level for alternatives.
Comparison level for alternatives: a person’s judgment of whether they could do better in another relationship, or by leaving the relationship altogether.
A person may be unhappy in a relationship but still remain in it if they believe there are no better alternatives. By contrast, someone may leave a reasonably satisfying relationship if they think a more rewarding option is available. This helps explain why satisfaction and stability are not always the same thing.
Stages of relationship development
Thibaut and Kelley suggested that social exchange processes operate across different stages of relationship development. These stages describe how partners become increasingly committed as rewards increase and exchanges become more established.
Sampling stage: people explore the rewards and costs of social interactions. They compare different potential partners and experiences.
Bargaining stage: the relationship begins, and partners negotiate roles, expectations, and the balance of exchange. Each person may try to increase rewards and reduce costs.
Commitment stage: the relationship becomes more stable and predictable. Partners are more confident that the relationship is profitable.
Institutionalization stage: patterns of exchange are well established. The relationship becomes governed by shared routines and social expectations.
These stages suggest that relationships are not judged just once. Instead, evaluation is ongoing, especially in early development, until stable patterns form.
Research support
There is some support for the basic idea that people consider rewards and costs. Research on relationship satisfaction often finds that individuals report greater happiness when they feel the benefits of the relationship outweigh the negatives. This gives some support to the central claim that perceived outcomes matter.
The theory is also useful because it explains why people may stay in unrewarding relationships. If their comparison level for alternatives is low, they may believe leaving would lead to an even worse outcome. This makes the theory more realistic than a simple claim that people always leave unhappy relationships.
Limitations
One criticism is that the theory may be overly reductionist. Romantic relationships involve emotions, morality, loyalty, and attachment, yet social exchange theory can make them seem like cold cost-benefit calculations. Many people do not consciously evaluate relationships in such a rational way.
A second criticism is that support is mixed. Some studies suggest that people in the early stages of dating think more about exchange, while people in long-term relationships focus less on profit and more on emotional commitment. This suggests the theory may explain the start of relationships better than their maintenance.
There are also problems with measuring rewards and costs. These are highly subjective, so they can be difficult to define consistently in research. What counts as a reward may change over time, making the theory harder to test precisely.
Finally, the theory may reflect the values of individualistic cultures, where personal gain and choice are emphasized. In other cultural contexts, romantic relationships may be shaped more strongly by family expectations, duty, or collective goals than by individual profit.
Practice Questions
Outline one feature of social exchange theory. (2 marks)
1 mark for identifying a relevant feature of social exchange theory, such as rewards, costs, profit, comparison level, or comparison level for alternatives.
1 additional mark for accurate elaboration, for example that people stay in relationships when rewards outweigh costs.
Explain how social exchange theory accounts for satisfaction and stability in romantic relationships. (6 marks)
1 mark for explaining that relationships are judged in terms of rewards and costs.
1 mark for explaining profit as the balance between rewards and costs.
1 mark for explaining comparison level as the standard used to judge satisfaction.
1 mark for explaining that relationships above the comparison level are more satisfying.
1 mark for explaining comparison level for alternatives as the judgment of other possible options.
1 mark for explaining that low alternatives can maintain stability even when satisfaction is low, or that high alternatives can reduce stability.
FAQ
It may work better for relationships where people are actively weighing choices, such as early dating or unstable partnerships.
In highly committed relationships, people may act from habit, identity, moral values, or emotional bonds rather than deliberate exchange. This can make the theory more accurate in some contexts than others.
Major events can quickly change what counts as a reward or cost.
For example:
a new job may increase time pressure
illness may increase caregiving demands
moving in together may increase support but reduce privacy
This means the same relationship can feel profitable at one point and less profitable later, even if the partner has not changed much.
Yes. Social exchange theory assumes judgments are subjective.
One partner may value emotional closeness most, while the other values independence or shared goals. Because they attach different importance to different outcomes, they can reach very different conclusions about the same relationship.
Researchers often use:
self-report questionnaires on satisfaction, rewards, and costs
interviews about relationship experiences
longitudinal studies tracking couples over time
diary methods recording daily positives and negatives
Longitudinal methods are especially useful because exchange processes can change as relationships develop.
Not necessarily. The theory says people respond to perceived outcomes, but some rewards are deeply social or caring.
Helping a partner, sacrificing time, or offering support may still be rewarding if it creates closeness, trust, or a sense of meaning. So the theory includes emotional and interpersonal rewards, not just material gain.
