The Parklife Conformer...

While studying for our exam last week I found myself reflecting on the notion of our need to belong and the lengths that we will go to achieve a sense on belonging to a group. The idea of conformity and the Asch experiments was particularly interesting because on initial reflection I viewed the people who had conformed as silly and thought that in a similar situation I would definately have gone against the crowd. Thinking about this further, I wondered, Would I really?

In the weeks leading up to Parklife (a dance festival a few weeks ago) I remember having a conversation with a friend about how there was no way i was going to follow the developing trend of wearing bright fluoro colours and silly headbands etc. just to 'fit in' at the festival. But as thew day drew closer and all my friends were involved in shopping for their crazy fluoro outfits and accessories I began to feel I was going to be on the outer. My need to belong, not to the crowd as a whole, but to my close friendship group was beginning to take over. Sure enough in the days leading up to the event I had bought fluoro paints, a number of shirts, crazy bright red sunnies and some lovely green tights. I had officially succomed to my need to belong, all of a sudden felt deindividualised, and then gone a step further top make myself different again. I ended up being the brightest of the group, butI had a great day, and I didn't have to think about not belinging to the group... The things we do to belong.

I think examples like this one from my life are the reason this course has been so interesting. almost all of the theories we had explored are so easily applied to everyday life. Even those that I though other people might do, but not neccissarily me. It seems I'm a huge conformist like the rest of us...

Friendship, Sexuality, and Social Norms: Applying Social Exchange Theory

Social exchange theory is one of a number of social science theories that has been proposed to explain the dynamics of how humans interact. The exchange theory has its foundations in neo-classical economic theory, and has been applied in a number of disciplines including anthropology, sociology and social psychology (Johar, 2005; Sprecher, 1998). The economic framework of exchange theory has been applied to a range of social relationships including those between workers, neighbours, friends, business associates and even intimate lovers, and it is becoming apparent that regardless of the level of interaction, the fundamentals of the theory remain the same (Lawler & Thye, 1999). This brief paper will explain the basic ideas and framework of social exchange theory, highlight the importance of social norms and gender roles, and demonstrate its application to two levels of social interaction: Friendship and sexuality. Examples from my own life and experiences are used to further illustrate the basic principles of the theory.

Exchange Theory
Social exchange theory as a generalisation relies on three main assumptions. The first assumes that each person is a self-interested actor that transacts with other actors to accomplish a range of individual goals that they perceive cannot be achieved alone. The second assumption is that individuals attempt to maximise the rewards and minimise the costs of any interactions. Rewards are defined as exchanged resources that are perceived as pleasurable and gratifying to an individual and have some perceived value. Costs are defined as exchanged resources that result in a feeling of loss or punishment, including the loss of alternatives and opportunities (Blau, 1964; McGraw & Tetlock, 2005). According to the theory, the outcome of any social interaction is the rewards minus the costs, and when this transaction is seen as positive or balanced the individual feels the interaction was a success and is more likely to continue the relationship. If the transaction is perceived to be negative or costly, the individual is less likely to repeat similar transactions and is more likely to discontinue the relationship (Blau, 1964; Sprecher, 1998). The third fundamental assumption of exchange theory is that when individuals perceive they have received a reward from others, they experience dissonance and feel obliged to reciprocate and restore balance to the relationship (Sprecher, 1998). Costs and rewards can take many forms and vary considerably particularly through a range of relationship levels. These may include material goods and needs, nonmaterial goods (such as services) and completely non-monetary forms of exchange such as time or emotion, and it is becoming increasingly apparent that in more intimate relationships such as friendships or romantic partnerships, nonmaterial resources often have a higher value and are of greater importance when considering the outcome of interactions.

Friendship
Humans have a strong, innate need to belong that is visible through our drive to form and maintain positive, lasting and significant personal interpersonal relationships. This suggests that people have a consistent goal to engage in frequent, pleasant contact with others who we have formed stable bonds of mutual concern, (Laursen & Hartup, 2002) which is perhaps best demonstrated through the relationship example of close friends. People often have an extensive network of acquaintances and friends from a range of different social forums, such as work, university and sporting teams, most people seek a limited number of close friends (about 4-6) (Baumeister & Bushman, 2008). It appears that further developing these close friendships is the goal for most people and friendship fits the cliché of ‘quality not quantity’.

When considering examples from my own life the indications proposed by the model became increasingly apparent. Firstly, it seems the initial assumption that most people seek out a limited number of close friendships was true for me. As exchange theory proposes, those relationships which have endured and become deeper are those where I have perceived I am receiving a balanced number of rewards compared to costs. My closest, longest lasting friendship surfaces as an example of interaction that is often linked with a feeling that what was invested into the relationship as costs, would usually be reciprocated with equal or greater rewards and, as a result, transactions with this friend are consistently associated with pleasurable feelings and the sense that I’m developing a worthwhile and rewarding relationship.

It is the desire to continually deepen the level of friendship and increase understanding that is perhaps for this reason that many of the resources involved in exchanges at this level are less physical in their nature. Studies have found that while material resources such as money, food and clothing may be involved in some transactions among friends, other forms of rewards often take precedence (Lawler & Thye, 1999; Wildermuth et. al, 2006). These other ‘gifts’ may include a range of things such as acceptance, approval, compliments, physical company, emotional disclosure, assistance on a task, commitment of time, or the sharing of knowledge (Wildermuth et. al, 2006; Johar, 2005).

Take buying a round of expensive drinks for a group of friends as an example. The round may cost $30, which would have taken up to 2 hours to earn through employment, while they are often consumed in a very short time and the rewards may appear to be short lived. However, the cost of purchasing the drinks, in this case monetary, is rewarded with the felt appreciation by the friendship group, as well as an increased feeling of belonging to the group and pleasurable emotions. These subjective and emotional rewards often have a higher value within friendship groups as they contribute to our innate need to belong.

Social Norms in Friendship
Social norms have also been highlighted as influencing the felt value of transactions with friends. A study by Johar (2005) found that people may not always seek to maximise the economic utility, or value, of a transaction, when social norms are a factor. The study found that not only do people abide by social norms in their own interactions, but they feel distressed if norms are violated by others. In the ‘round of drinks’ example, the situational norm suggest that each member of the friendship group who received a drink, would return the favour by purchasing a round themselves. If a friend abided by this norm, as an addition to the emotional rewards I received initially, I receive a drink to balance the exchange, and the felt positive outcome is increased. However, if this social norm was dishonoured, I may perceive it as another cost, which affects the relationship negatively.

Sexuality
Exchange theory can be observed in almost all social interactions and an increasingly large body of research has focussed on its application to love, mate selection and sexuality. In a meta-analytic study South (1991) demonstrated the tendency for people to marry those of similar status. Exchange theories provide a view that could account for much this trend of homogamy and suggest that people of similar status are more able, and therefore likely, to reciprocate expected rewards and maintain an equitable relationship. Often those resources most sought after by a certain socio-economic group can best be matched or complimented by someone of a similar status, thus these partnerships occur more often. A real life behavioural example can be seen when both men and women conduct a matching process and choose those with the best package of rewards – the best ‘catch’.

An interesting development in the study of exchange theory and sexuality is the idea of exchange of sex as a reward or commodity within relationships (Rijt & Macy, 2006). Research has identified sex as a resource that is essentially controlled by women. Men seek to acquire sex from women by exchanging it for a range of other resources, and often social norms and gender roles are assigned accordingly (Baumeister & Vohs, 2004). This phenomenon can certainly be observed in the real world. Men are often seen buying extravagant gifts for women, showing off power and wealth and providing security both physically and emotionally for women. Some researchers would suggest this is purely in exchange for sex (Sprecher, 1998). As mentioned previously, violating social norms can also lead to distress in interactions, suggesting that men are more likely to gain the reward of sex by adhering to these norms and gender roles. In life, according to exchange theory, men could create a situation of reciprocity by paying for dinner, holding the door and offering their coat to a potential intimate partner and they may be rewarded with sex.

Conclusion
So it can be seen that social exchange theory and its simple costs and rewards analysis can be applied to a range of social interactions in a plethora of situations. When applied to the aspect of friendship, it is demonstrated that friendships are more likely to continue and develop if a situation of reciprocity exists, particularly if non-material rewards are involved and cater for the human need to belong. The relevance of exchange theory to sexuality has also been highlighted, with the implication that in sexual economics, transactions are focussed around sex as a female controlled commodity. In the two current examples of friendship and sexuality, the influence of social norms on exchange transactions should also be viewed as an important aspect. Social exchange theory is proving to be an extremely relevant and versatile model and continued social study of its application may prove enormously beneficial for the understanding of humans and their complex social interactions.

(Word Count: 1532)


References

Baumeister, R. F., & Bushman, B. J. (2008) Social Psychology and Human Nature. USA: Thomson Wadworth

Baumeister, R. F., & Vohs, K. D. (2004) Sexual economics: Sex as female resource for social exchange in heterosexual interactions. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 8, 339-363.

Blau, P. N. (1964). Exchange and Power in Social Life. New York: Wiley.

Johar, G. V. (2005). The price of friendship: when, why, and how relational norms guide social exchange behaviour. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15, 22-27.

Laursen, B., & Hartup, W. W. (2002). The origins of reciprocity and social exchange in friendships. New Directions for Child and Adolescent Development, 95, 27-40.

Lawler, E. J., & Thye, S. R. (1999). Bringing emotions into social exchange theory. Annual Review of Sociology, 25, 217-244.

McGraw, A. P. (2005). Taboo trade-offs, relational framing, and the acceptability of exchanges. Journal of Consumer Psychology, 15 (1), 2-15.


Rijt, A. V., & Macy, M.W. (2006). Power and dependence in intimate exchange. Social Forces, 84 (3), 1455-1460.

South, S. J. (1991). Socio-demographic differentials in mate selection preferences. Journal of Marriage and the Family, 53, 928-940.

Sprecher, S. (1998). Social exchange theories and sexuality. Journal of Sex Research, 35, 32-43.

Wildermuth, S. M., Vogl-Bauer, S., & Rivera, J. (2006). Practically perfect in every way: communication strategies of ideal relational partners. Communication Strategies, 57 (3), 239-257.



Appendix A. Self Evaluation

Theory and Research
I found the topic of social exchange theory very engaging and interesting, which made reading sources and research on the topic much more tolerable, and in the end I read extensively on a broad range of topics and aspects of the theory. This did however leave me with the difficult task of choosing which aspects to focus on, based on what I believed I could fit into the world limit. My question also asked me to provide examples from my own life, while this made writing the blog more engaging and provided a change from strict essay style writing, it meant that I has reduced words to discuss relevant theory. I possibly choose to approach this topic too broadly and a possible focus on the fundamentals of the theory would have made adjusting to the word limit more feasible. Overall I think I researched extensively and included as much information as possible, while successfully including examples from my own life and ther real world to explain the theory.

Written Expression
Similar to the last blog, APA format was followed wherever possible, however some aspects of the format were lost in tranferring to the blog format. As mentioned above, my question asked me to provide real life examples to further explain my points. While interesting, this was a very different approach to writing compared to the very scientific nature of the majority of writing I have grown accustomed to studying psychology, and my usually commended writing style may have suffered accordingly. I do believe however, that I was reasonably succesful in adjusting and maintaining a flow throughout the blog. I have taken note of a self-suggestion from my last blog and maintained headings to help with the structure and flow of the blog to make for easier reading. It must be remembered that the purpose of my blog was to explain in the clearest possible manner the basics of social exchange theory.

The Flesch reading ease statistic was 29.8 which is around the target audience of undergraduate students. The Flesch-Kincaid grade level was 12 which is also around the target area. Overall I feel that despite the adjustments to my usual writing style the paper flows and is relatively easy to read.

Online engagement
This was definitely my weakest point of the blogging exercise for blog 1 so I have made a concerted effort to improve my online engagement for this blog. I began by improving the overall appearance of my blog page, and took the time to take more notice of what my fellow students were doing on the blog page. I made a number of postings, which on the whole were received well, as thewy were commented on and raised discussion. I spent the majority of my time blogging commenting on a range of other students blogs and have taken the time to add a number of those to a comments list in my blog. These comments also contributed to and raised further discussion within the group, both online and generally amongst students during class. While I still haven’t engaged as some students within the unit I have made considerable improvements and feel much more a part of the unit in general.

Information Overload Making Teens Sick

Hey bloggers!

I’ve been dwelling on a few of the ideas that were raised in Hugh Mckay’s lecture and the following discussion in yesterday’s tutorial. I was particularly interested by the ideas of information overload, the changing social face of Australia and the influences of materialism, consumerism and the technological age on the youth of this country.

McKay mentioned that as a reaction to change and as life speeds up in modern Australia, there was an increase in the consumption of anti-depressants and a range of other illicit and licit drugs. I read an article recently where Richard Eckersley suggested that many aspects of modern life including social structural changes, such as family breakdown, excessive materialism, global warming, the changing diet and even the decline of religion were leading to a range of physical and psychological health problems in teenagers. Some of the health problems he highlighted were road accidents, drug use, diabetes and heart disease and mood disorders. Like the evolutionists Mckay talked about, Eckersley also believed that human’s haven’t had time to evolve to the stresses of modern life, which was contributing to these health issues.

Looking at the information overload theory, which describes a state of having too much information to make a decision or stay informed about a topic, causing distress. I wonder is the influence of the technological or information age and the huge array of sources from which we can gain information, having a detrimental effect on our social, psychological and pysical health. Television use and variety has skyrocketed, the internet gives us endless sources of information including youtube, wikipedia, and blog sites such as this one and facebook, and still other forms of media thrive. The stress of what to take in and analyse, and what to ignore may be getting too much.

There is also the aspect of the content, accuracy and impartiality of this constant flow of information. With such a variety of mediums it is almost impossible to gain accurate and neutral information, particularly when often those that are most biased or untested are more easily accessed or simply thrust in our face.

The simple solution would be to encourage everyone, especially youth, to seek out new information, make time to search for the truth and make their own decisions. However, if information overload is already causing them stress, how in this forever speedy, stressful new world are they to find the time and energy to seek out this information? Another article I read, suggested that Australian children are already sleeping more than 30 minutes less a night compared with 20 years ago, with 25% suggesting they are tired the majority of the time and their sleep quality is poor. If a quarter of Australia’s youth are always tired the sad thing is it may be easier to simply sit back and be informed by ‘Today Tonight’.

Would this an endless search for accurate and impartial information simply just cause less sleep and more stress and health problems?
It possibly would, but I think I’d be less stressed in the belief that I had some idea what was going on in the world or at least in this country.

Thankyou again for reading my rambling, I hope I made a point in there somewhere and comments and questions are definately welcome.

Happy studying guys!
Dave

Social Exchange Theory

Hey guys,
So I've had my topic picked for a while now, but have spent most of my time commenting on other people's great posts.
Thought it was time to start throwing up some of my own, but i'll ease into it with a very basic (wikipedia) definition of my topic - social exchange theory.

Social exchange theory is a social psychological and sociological perspective that explains social change and stability as a process of negotiated exchanges between parties. Social exchange theory posits that all human relationships are formed by the use of a subjective cost-benefit analysis and the comparison of alternatives. For example, when a person perceives the costs of a relationship as outweighing the perceived benefits, then the theory predicts that the person will choose to leave the relationship. The theory has roots in economics, psychology and sociology.
For social exchange theorists, when the costs and benefits are equal in a relationship, then that relationship is defined as equitable. The notion of equity is a core part of social exchange theory.

I think social exchange theorists would take an interesting view of this cartoon I've found.

It seems that the girl is willing to make some significant investments in the relationship, and in doing so improve its benefits, while the boy is probably thinking about what a long-term relationship with this girl would cost his sense of identity. Does he have an alternative option that likes him just the way he is, or won't cost him as much?

Anyway I'll be back with some more exciting perspectives on this interesting theory soon...

Response to: Examples of Media Violence

See At: http://mrsfreud.blogspot.com/2007/09/examples-of-media-violence.html

Hey Loz,

That clip of cartoon violence is pretty intense. Like Clare and Mark I didn't really notice how violent 'family guy' and 'drawn together' were. I'd always been aware that they pushed a lot of social boundaries, which is often their appeal, but seeing a compilation like that was an eye-opener.

I agree with Clare that a mixed message about death is being sent to children, when cartoon characters die and come back to life, however i think it should be remembered that the cartoons in that video are aimed at an adult audience. The Loony Tunes' Coyote in Roadrunner also died and came back several times each episode, in a program aimed at kids. I'm not sure if there was outrage when these cartoons began, but it has certainly ceased and these cartoons are now seen as family favourites. Is this an idication of society as a whole being desensitised? Or was that compilation just really effective in highlighting the extreme violence in those cartoons?

I think the more important issue with violence in the media, is not so much content, but like the second video says, who sees it. There is no disputing that violence in the media affects children in a number of ways, by desensitising them, and setting them an example. I'll always remember being banned from Teenage MutantNinja Turtles for fly kicking everybody I saw. It's probably lucky I hadn't seen Drawn Together and had access to a big knife or my sister might have been a bit sore...

If TV shows, movies and computer games aren't meant for children, then more needs to be done to prevent children from getting access to them. Drawn Together aired at around 9pm on SBS. This is late to prevent most children, but surely not all. And I believe Foxtel has a parent lock out system, we can only hope and assume parents are using it.

Then again, kids can always watch the news... and to quote Alicia Silverstone's ‘Cher’ in all her brilliance in Clueless.

"...even if you took out all the violent shows, you could still see the news. So, until mankind is peaceful enough not to have violence on the news, there's no point in taking it out of shows that need it for entertainment value..."

Who knew that movie could be so insightful?

Very interesting videos and topic in general Loz. Should be fun exploring it.

-Dave