Questions: Social Exchange Theory and Relationship Satisfaction

Question 1

Sara reports her relationship gives her fewer rewards than she expected and she is unhappy. Yet she has been with her partner for 8 years, owns a home together, and has few close friendships outside the relationship. What does Social Exchange Theory predict about whether Sara will stay?

• A. She will likely leave — she is unhappy, and rational actors seek to maximize rewards
• B. She will stay if her expectations (CL) were already low enough that she still feels satisfied
• C. She is likely to stay — high investment and low alternatives (CLalt) predict commitment even when dissatisfied
• D. She will stay only if her absolute rewards still exceed her absolute costs

Answer: (C)

Social Exchange Theory distinguishes satisfaction from commitment. CL (comparison level) determines satisfaction — rewards vs. expectations — but whether someone stays is determined by CLalt (comparison level for alternatives) and investment. Sara's 8-year history, joint property, and few outside connections represent high investment and low CLalt. The theory explicitly explains why people remain in relationships they describe as unsatisfying: leaving requires a viable alternative, and too much is at stake to exit. Option A is the common misconception — dissatisfaction does not predict exit.

Question 2

Person A was raised in a high-conflict household; Person B had a previous partner who was unusually attentive. Both are now in objectively identical relationships. Who is likely to report higher satisfaction, and why?

• A. Person A — their low comparison level (CL) means the current relationship exceeds expectations
• B. Person B — more prior relationship experience leads to more accurate reward assessment
• C. They will report the same satisfaction, because objective outcomes determine satisfaction
• D. Person B — higher prior quality raises CLalt and therefore commitment

Answer: (A)

Satisfaction is determined not by absolute rewards but by rewards relative to one's comparison level (CL) — expectations shaped by past experience. Person A's high-conflict upbringing produces a low CL; the current relationship exceeds that bar. Person B's unusually attentive ex sets a high CL; the same current relationship falls short. Identical objective conditions can produce opposite satisfaction because subjective expectations differ. Option C reflects the misconception that outcomes alone determine satisfaction.

Question 3

According to the investment model extension of Social Exchange Theory, a person may remain committed to a relationship even when current rewards fall below their comparison level, if they have invested heavily in the relationship.

• T. True
• F. False

Answer: True

Rusbult's investment model adds investment — shared history, mutual friends, joint finances, children — as a third predictor of commitment alongside reward-cost balance and CLalt. High investment raises the psychological cost of exit independently of current satisfaction, explaining why commitment can persist even when rewards decline. This is one of the clearest departures from a simple reward-maximization model.

Question 4

Social Exchange Theory predicts that dissatisfied people will leave their relationships, because the theory assumes people act to maximize their rewards.

• T. True
• F. False

Answer: False

This conflates satisfaction with commitment and ignores CLalt and investment. The theory predicts behavior relative to perceived alternatives, not absolute maximization. A dissatisfied person with low CLalt (few social options, economic dependence) and high investment may rationally remain. The theory explicitly accounts for people who stay in relationships they openly describe as unsatisfying — staying can be the rational choice when alternatives are worse and exit costs are high.

Question 5

What does the comparison level for alternatives (CLalt) explain that the comparison level (CL) alone cannot, and why does this matter for understanding why people stay in unhappy relationships?

Model answer: CL determines how satisfied someone feels (rewards relative to expectations), but CLalt determines whether they stay — what they believe they could get from the best available alternative. Someone can be dissatisfied (rewards < CL) but remain if their alternatives look even worse (rewards > CLalt). CL and CLalt can point in opposite directions, and it is CLalt, not satisfaction, that best predicts relationship persistence.

Without this distinction, you would predict all dissatisfied people leave — clearly false. CLalt captures the real behavioral constraint: leaving requires a viable alternative. Low CLalt — few outside social connections, economic dependence, geographic isolation — can trap people in unsatisfying relationships not through irrationality but through a rational assessment of constrained choices. This is why CEA models emphasizing 'maximize rewards' miss the action.