Social exchange theory .10529

TLDR: In the last fifteen years, there has emerged in sociology and social psychology a distinct approach called social exchange theory as mentioned in this paper, which can be classified into three broad categories: social behaviour as exchange, social behavior as exchange theory, and social exchange as social behavior.

Abstract: During the last fifteen years there has emerged in sociology and social psychology a distinct approach called social exchange theory. Four figures were largely responsible: George Homans, John Thibaut, Harold Kelley, and Peter Blau. Homans in "Social behavior as exchange" (1958) made a conscious effort to identify and advance this point of view. In 1961, he amplified his argument in Social Behavior: Its Elementary Forms, which has now been revised (1974). Also in the late 1950s Thibaut & Kelley were constructing their compact conceptual scheme in The Social Psychology of Groups (1959). While different in important ways, their work converged with Homans's, strengthening the general exchange approach. When Blau's Exchange and Power (1 964a) appeared, the exchange approach was assured a future in the field. The differences between these three major works were as important in launching the exchange approach as were their similarities. While Blau gave more emphasis to technical economic analysis, Homans dwelled more upon the psychology of instrumental behavior. Yet in doing so, he drew upon a different brand of psychology than that represented by Thibaut & Kelley. In addition, they employed different strategies of theory construction. Thibaut & Kelley start with psychological concepts, build upward to the dyad, and build upward from there to the small group. Homans takes a more reductionist approach, moving in the opposite direction. With considerable knowledge of group-level processes already in mind, he points to the psychological principles of reinforcement which, he claims, help to explain them. However, Peter Blau, contrary to both of these approaches, warns us that preoccupation with psychology can blind us to the important emergent aspects of social exchange. When three strong statements such as these diverge on particulars, yet converge on a central viewpoint-social exchange as a frame of reference-that viewpoint will be given greater impetus. Now, seventeen years later, exchange theory is still growing; it still contains diversity and sparks of controversy.