Social exchange theory: a theory of intimate relationships proposing that participants in all social

interactions pursue their self-interest through the exchange of social goods, such as status, approval, and
information.
Dyad: a group consisting of two people; the smallest possible social group
Interdependence theory: a version of social exchange theory that focuses on the rules predicting how
partners will behave toward each other, and how they evaluate the outcomes of their actions.
Rewards: in social exchange theory, one of the concrete benefits provided by a relationship, such as money,
housing, food, and protection
Costs: in social exchange theory, any consequence of being in a relationship that prevents partners from
meeting their needs and desired
Material rewards: in social exchange theory, one of the concrete benefits provided by a relationship, such as
money, housing, food, and protection.
Social rewards: in social exchange theory, one of the benefits people derive from relationships,
including companionship, validation, and security.
Opportunity cost: In social exchange theory, the idea that pursuing one rewarding experience (e.g., a
relationship with one person) prevents the ability to pursue other potential rewards (e.g., a particular career
choice). Outcome Rewards Costs
Subjective probability: in social exchange theory, a person’s judgments about the likelihood of different
possible outcomes of his or her actions Satisfaction outcome CL
Comparison level (CL): In social exchange theory, the standard against which partners in a relationship
compare their experiences to decide whether they are satisfied in their relationship.
Dependence: In social exchange theory, the degree to which a person feels free to leave a relationship; a
function of how a relationship compares to possible alternatives Dependence outcome
Crall
Comparison level for alternative (CL atl): In social exchange theory, a person’s perceptions of the possible
alternatives to a current relationship, independent from comparison level (CL)
Alternative: In social exchange theory, all the possible relationship options apart from a current relationship,
including being alone
Barriers: in social exchange theory, any force outside of a relationship that acts to keep partners together
Investments: In social exchange theory, a resource a couple shares in a relationship that would be lost
following a breakup
commitment satisfaction Dependence
Commitment: The intention to be in a relationship, including efforts to maintain it, investing in a relationship
to help ensure that it lasts
satisfaction themajorelements
High how
and
Attracted Abusiverelationship rewards, costs, alternatives, barriers and investment - involve psychological
High mutuallycommitted emptyshell
factors such as perceptions of the partner and feelings of love, contextual one
relationships marriages
Dependence
strangerspairs such as the presence of available alternatives, cultural fact ors such as social
Uncommitted
Low lovers thatarenow norms and standards and demographic factors including socioeconomic status
dissolved

Main points:
• social exchange theory proposes partners evaluate their relationship by weighing the perceived rewards and costs they are experiencing at the
moment
• A given level of outcomes is satisfying if it is greater than the person’s comparison level (CL), a standard for what is expected from any relationship;
a set of outcomes may be satisfying to someone with a low CL but unsatisfying to someone with a high CL
• In deciding whether to stay together, partners compare their outcomes to a different standard: the comparison levl for alternatives (CL alt), the level
of outcomes a person expects to receive outside the current relationship
• By distinguishing between CL and CL alt, the theory suggests that satisfaction (liking the relationship) and dependence (needing the relationshio) are
independent ideas
• The main limitation of social exchange theory is that it cannot explain how perceptions of rewards and costs may change over time, or how
relationships that start out satisfying may deteriorate.
Social learning theory: A theory of intimate relationships proposing that people learn about their
relationships from their interactions with their partners, such that positive interactions strengthen initial
satisfaction, whereas negative interactions and unresolved conflicts decrease satisfaction.
Coercion theory: an offshoot of social learning theory, the idea that partners may unintentionally reinforce
each other’s undesirable patterns by giving in only when a certain negative behavior has grown particularly
intense.
Escape conditioning: the reinforcing of behaviors that lead to the end of a negative experience
Negative reciprocity: an interpersonal pattern in which one person responds to the other’s negative behavior
with a negative behavior of his or her own; a common experience in distressed relationship.

Main points:
• Social learning theory proposes that people learn about their relationships from their experience of each
interaction with their partners, such that positive interactions strengthen initial satisfaction, whereas
negative interactions and unresolved conflicts decrease satisfaction.
• By closely analyzing what partners actually do when they communicate with each other, social learning
theorists explore how partners may inadvertently reinforce each other’s ineffective or punishing behaviors.
• By identifying negative behaviors, researchers hope to teach couples more effective ways of communicating,
thereby improving their relationships.
• Social learning theory does not address the broader context of dyadic interactions- that is, where behaviors
come from or how they may change naturally over time. persona
I Ointeraction othero
Expressesanopinion LearnsthatDagrees
withownopinion
u
affect
Feelspositive

Learnsthatosupports
u
expressesagreement
ownopinion
feels
w affect
p ositive

closer
moves too
opinion
further
Discuses likeme
thinks I seemsto

Feels affect
positive
µ
thinksthatomightbec Makessupportivecomment
anunderstandingpartner
w
saysAre doing
you
tonight
anything Thechainganinitialdyadicinteraction

Social ecological model: a theory of intimate relationships that describes how stressed, supports and
describes how stresses, supports and constraints in the environment
may affect the way partners think, feel and act in relationship.
Microsystem: A level in Bronfenbrenner’s social ecological
model of development consisting of immediate environment
that directly impacts individuals and couples, including their
living situation, stressful life events and the presence or absence
of the people
Mesosystem: A level in Bronfenbrenner’s social ecological
model of development, consisting of the broader social context,
including the neighborhoods, social networks and institutions in
which relationships take place.
Macrosystem: the broadest level in Bronfenbrenner’s social
ecological model of development, consisting of sources of
influence that are far removed from the individual’s or couple’s
direct experience but are still influential, such as national,
 historical, and cultural contexts.

ABC-X model: an early social ecological model of intimate

relationships that explains how external stressors (A), a family’s
resources (B), and their interpretation of a stressful event (C)
combine to affect the outcome of a crisis (X)
Stressor: an event or circumstance that makes demands on a
person and requires some kind of adjustment, response, or
adaptation
Resources: an asset; a source of practical, social, or emotional
support outside a couple that contributes to their ability to interact
effectively or adapt to stresses and circumstance
Interpretation of the event: the way a couple or a family defines
a stressful experience, as a challenge to be overcome or a
catastrophe to be endured; represented by C in the ABC-X model.
Crisis: a couple’s experience of and response to a stressful event,
represented by X in the ABC-X model
Double ABC-X model: a revision of the ABC-X model that recognizes how each element in the original model
may change over time as a couple responds to a stressful event.
Stress pile-up: The accumulating consequences of a stressful event that can themselves be as stressful as or
even more stressful than the original event.
Lifespan studies: A longitudinal research design that gathers data from individuals repeatedly over the
course of their lives.

Main points:
• Social ecological models emphasize that the environment surrounding a couple can support or damage
their relationship.
• The ABC-X model draws links between stressors (A), or events requiring behavioral change; the resources
(B) a couple can use in responding to the stressor; the couple's interpretation of the event (C); and their
successful or unsuccessful adaptation to the crisis (X).
• The double ABC-X model acknowledges that each element in the original model changes over time
• Most social ecological models share the focus on stressors, resources, interpretation, and responding; the
same event may have different implications for relationships,
depending on the level of available resources and the couple's
coping ability
• The limits of these models lie in their failures to specify how
resources and coping styles may change over time, and to
explain why some couples develop skills to meet their
challenges when others do not.
Three unifying themes emerge:
1. Dyadic interaction. If the interaction between two people is the heart of any relationship, then
understanding intimate relationships requires taking partners' behaviors and responses to each other--
their dyadic interaction--into account. Within the theories we have discussed, the nature of this
interaction comes up repeatedly. Social learning theory addresses dyadic interaction directly, suggesting
that chains of behavior and interpretation are the mechanism of change and stability in relationships.
Attachment theory also reters to rewarding, supportive interactions as a foundation of secure attachment,
and views unresponsive interactions as a source of insecurity. Social ecological models similarly point out
that the way couples cope together with external stress is essential to the impact of outside challenges on
the relationship.
2. Individual differences. Partners do not enter their relationships as blank slates. They bring to each new
relationship the sum of all their previous experiences, including personality, values, history, ethnicity,
culture, and socioeconomic status--all of which amounts to a lot of individual differences. Most of the
theories acknowledge that the characteristics of the partners--as individuals and as a couple-affect the
course of an intimate relationship. Attachment theory highlights the internal working models and beliefs
about relationships that start in early childhood and continue throughout life. Individual differences also
come up in the evolutionary perspective, with its focus on the evolved psychological mechanisms as stable
qualities of human beings. Each individual brings different comparison levels to the relationship,
according to social exchange theory. We can also think of the resources emphasized by social ecological
models as an individual difference, in that partners vary in their ability to cope with stressful
circumstances when they arise.
3. External circumstances. Relationships are affected not only by what goes on within them, but also by the
external circumstances around them, including social, physical, cultural, and historical forces. Social
ecological models place the most emphasis on a couple's environment. but other theories refer to it as
well. Social exchange theory states that the alternatives available outside of a relationship play an
important role in determining whether the relationship will endure. Even the evolutionary perspective
acknowledges that psychological mechanisms are sensitive to environmental cues.

Main points:
• Prevailing theories all address three unifying themes that any comprehensive understanding of intimate
relationships must take into account.
• Most theories acknowledge the centrality of dyadic interaction, the way couples behave and respond to
each other.
• Most theories also recognize that each partner brings to a relationship a set of individual differences that
make each person unique.
• Most theories address the powerful role that external circumstances can play in shaping experiences within
the relationship.