Social exchange theory basically requires a weighing of one’s can cost you and you may rewards in the certain relationship (Harvey Wenzel, 2006)


Chủ đầu tư
Địa chỉ
Loại hình
Số tầng
Mặt tiền
Tổng diện tích
Công năng
Đơn vị thiết kế
Năm thực hiện

Social exchange theory basically requires a weighing of one’s can cost you and you may rewards in the certain relationship (Harvey Wenzel, 2006)

Rewards was outcomes we rating out-of a romance one benefit us in some way, whenever you are will cost you are priced between giving prefers so you’re able to taking psychological assistance. Once we do not get the consequences or benefits we imagine i are entitled to, up coming we could possibly negatively evaluate the matchmaking, or perhaps confirmed exchange or time on relationships, and discover ourselves as being underbenefited. Inside the an equitable relationship, costs and you can rewards was healthy, which generally contributes to a positive assessment of your own relationship and you will fulfillment.

Union and you may interdependence are important social and you can mental size of an effective dating that relate with societal exchange theory. Interdependence refers to the dating anywhere between a person’s well-being and you will wedding within the a specific relationships. A man tend to feel interdependence for the a romance whenever (1) fulfillment is highest or the dating match important requires; (2) the fresh new solutions commonly an excellent, meaning the fresh people need couldnt feel came across without having any dating; otherwise (3) financing in the relationships was higher, which means that resources you’ll disappear or perhaps forgotten without having any dating (Harvey Wenzel, 2006).

We are able to be informed, even if, not to glance at societal change idea since a breast-for-tattoo bookkeeping of will cost you and you can benefits (Noller, 2006). I wouldnt become pretty good relational people when we transmitted up to a tiny notepad, notating per favor otherwise a good action i accomplished therefore we is also assume their payment. Just like the indexed before, everyone become aware of the bill off will set you back and you will rewards at some stage in our very own matchmaking, however, you to definitely feeling is not persistent. We also have public matchmaking, in which players do a relationship getting common work with and do not predict production for the assets such as for instance favors or good deeds (Harvey Wenzel, 2006). Since the fictional character inside the a relationship change, we may engage communally without even knowing they, by simply simply experiencing the relationship. It has been suggested we be more aware of the new can cost you and you may benefits equilibrium when a relationship is going as a result of argument (Noller, 2006). Complete, relationships are more likely to ensure it is if you have fulfillment and partnership, meaning that we have been happier for the a love intrinsically otherwise by the latest perks we discover.

Key Takeaways

  • Relationships can be simply recognized towards personal or personal and you can volunteer or unconscious.
  • Personal matchmaking try personal, sexual, and you may interdependent, meeting many of our interpersonal demands.
  • Personal matchmaking fulfill certain social means however, do not have the closeness from personal matchmaking.


  1. Comment the kinds of dating for the Shape seven.step one “Version of Relationships”. Identity a minumum of one people out of your dating that suits into each quadrant. Why does the communication differ ranging from each one of these someone?
  2. Come across a relationship vital that you both you and know very well what stage out of relational communication you’re currently during the with that people. What communicative indicators assistance the commitment? Any alternative stages regarding the 10 indexed have you knowledgeable about this person?
  3. How do you consider the expenses and you will perks on the matchmaking? What exactly are particular rewards you are already searching out of your nearest relationships? Preciselywhat are specific will set you back?


Harvey, J. H. and you may Amy Wenzel, “Theoretical Views from the Study of Personal Relationship,” on Cambridge Guide out-of Private Relationships, eds. Anita L. Vangelisti and you may Daniel Perlman (Cambridge: Cambridge School Drive, 2006), 3839.

Noller, P., “Providing It all Together with her: A theoretical Approach,” on the Cambridge Guide of Personal Dating, eds. Anita L. Vangelisti and you will Daniel Perlman (Cambridge: Cambridge College or university Force, 2006), 770.

VanLear, C. A great., Ascan Koerner, and you may Donna Yards. Allen, “Matchmaking Typologies,” on the Cambridge Manual away from Personal Relationships, eds. Anita L. Vangelisti and you may Daniel Perlman (Cambridge: Cambridge College or university Press, 2006), 95.