Cognitive consistency theory

1. Heider’s balance theory (refer pdf and net for diagram, popeys’s example)

Reinforcement Theories
1. Social Exchange Theory
Often, we are taught to weigh pros and cons, or risks and rewards, in decision-making. This
practice typically involves the pursuit of material things, but it can theoretically apply to our
interpersonal relationships.
The rationale behind this comes from a sociological concept known as social exchange theory.
The concept can be used to explore interpersonal dynamics in a wide range of contexts, from
dating and friendships to professional relationships. In social work, social exchange theory can
be an effective tool to help social workers better explore the complex relationships that may
hinder an individual’s ability to achieve optimal well-being. This understanding also can serve
as a means to help a social worker build rapport with a client.
Social exchange theory is not necessarily a one-size-fits-all concept. Individuals equipped with
an advanced degree in social work must have an understanding of the complexities behind the
theory and how these complexities may appear in different interpersonal, social, and group
contexts. Having this understanding can make it easier for them to fully use the concept.
History and Definition of the Theory
The genesis of social exchange theory goes back to 1958 when American sociologist George C.
Homans published an article titled “Social Behavior as Exchange.” Homans devised a
framework built on a combination of behaviorism and basic economics. In the immediate years
that followed, other studies expanded the parameters of Homans’ fundamental concepts.
Definition- it is a metric designed to determine how much effort someone invests in a one-on-
one relationship.
Social Exchange Theory (SET) Explained
There are five guiding principles of social exchange theory (Redmond, 2015):
Principle 1: Social behavior can be explained in terms of costs, rewards, and exchanges: this
principle’s importance comes from how it loosely applied economics to human decision-
making.
Principle 2: People seek to maximize rewards and minimize costs in the pursuit of the greatest
profit: this reflects a belief that people are generally motivated by their own self-interest,
regardless of the decision.
A relationship that at one time seemed to be a high reward or low cost may shift to one with
increasing costs and low rewards, causing that person to return to a more rewarding level or
terminate the relationship.
Principle 3: Social interaction involves two parties, each exchanging a reward needed by the
other person: in order to get rewards, people must exchange something better. This creates
interdependent relationships.
Principle 4: Social exchange theory can be used to explain the development and management
of interpersonal relationships.
Principle 5: Social exchanges affect the relationships among members of groups and
organizations.

Costs vs. Benefits

Social exchange theory suggests that we essentially take the benefits of a relationship and
subtract the costs in order to determine how much it is worth.
• Costs involve things that you see as negatives, such as having to put money, time, and
effort into a relationship. For example, if you have a friend who always borrows money
from you and does not repay it, this might be seen as a high cost.
• Benefits are things that you get out of the relationship, such as fun, friendship,
companionship, and social support. Your friend might be a bit of a freeloader, but bring a
lot of fun and excitement to your life. As you are determining the value of the friendship,
you might decide that the benefits outweigh the potential costs.
Positive relationships are those in which the benefits outweigh the costs. Negative
relationships occur when the costs are greater than the benefits.
Expectations and Comparison Levels
Cost-benefit analysis plays a major role in the social exchange process, but so do expectations.
As people weigh benefits against the costs, they do so by establishing a comparison level that
is often influenced by past experiences.
For example, if your previous romantic partner showered you with displays of affection, your
comparison level for your next relationship is going to be quite high when it comes to affection.
If your next romantic partner tends to be more reserved and less emotional, that person might
not measure up to your expectations.
If you have always had poor friendships, your comparison levels at the start of a relationship
will be lower than a person who has always had supportive and caring friends.
Expectations can appear within work relationships as well. Research indicates that there is an
"expectation of reciprocity" within workplace settings between management and staff.4 If an
employee doesn't feel that their effort is being reciprocated from higher-ups, this can affect
their work.
Impact of Social Exchange Theory on Relationships
The idea that relationships are based on an exchange can affect how we relate with others.
The Honeymoon Phase
The length of a friendship or romance can play a role in the social exchange process. During the
early weeks or months of a relationship, often referred to as the "honeymoon phase," people
are more likely to ignore the social exchange balance.
Things that would normally be viewed as high cost are dismissed, ignored, or minimized, while
potential benefits are often exaggerated. When this honeymoon period finally comes to an
end, there will often be a gradual evaluation of the exchange balance.
At this point, downsides become more apparent and benefits start to be seen more
realistically. This recalibration of the exchange balance might lead to the termination of the
relationship if the balance is tipped too far toward the negative side.
Evaluating the Alternatives
Another aspect of the social exchange process involves looking at possible alternatives. After
analyzing the costs and benefits and contrasting these against your comparison levels, you
might start to look at other options.
The relationship might not measure up to your comparison levels, but as you survey the
potential alternatives, you might determine it is still better than anything else available. As a
result, you might reassess the relationship in terms of what may now be a somewhat lower
comparison level.
Equity Determines Health
Since social exchange theory is based on give and take, if this back and forth exchange is not
considered equitable, it can affect the health of the relationship.1 The primary giver may feel
resentful while the primary receiver may be riddled with guilt.
If this type of exchange happens only once or twice, it likely won't impact the relationship.
However, if it becomes a pattern, feelings of resentment and guilt can start to build, creating a
point of contention between the two.

2. Theory of Social Interdependence by Thibaut and Kelley (1959)

It describes the ways in which individuals depend on the behaviour of others in achieving
favourable outcomes for themselves. Based on the premise that behaviour will not be
repeated
unless it is reinforced, the theory refers to a behaviour outcome matrix characteristic of
relationships. As an individual’s behaviour is affected by the responses of others to that
behaviour, the other person can therefore influence the kind of behaviour exhibited by the
individual by varying their own response to it. Included in this theory are the ideas of
comparison level and comparison level of alternatives. Comparison level refers to the standard
against which individuals evaluate their 9 relationships with others according to what they
believe they deserve. Relationships which incur outcomes above the comparative level are
considered to be satisfactory and attractive to the individual. However, if outcomes fall below
comparative level, they will be seen by the individual as unsatisfactory. The comparison level of
alternatives is the standard against which the individual decides whether or not to maintain a
relationship with another. The individual will have an idea regarding the lowest level of
outcomes they will accept before they end a relationship in the belief that they will receive
greater benefits from being in a different relationship.

Thibault and Kelley (1959) also identified a number of different stages of a relationship:
1. Sampling: partners consider the possible costs and benefits in the new relationship
through direct or indirect interactions and compare it to other relationships available.
2. Bargaining: partners exchange costs and benefits; they negotiate and identify what is
the most profitable.
3. Commitment: the relationship is stable and maintained by a predictable exchange of
rewards.
4. Institutionalization: partners have established norms in terms of costs and benefits.
They now settle down.

Social Comparison Theory

Social comparison theory suggests that people value their personal and social worth by
assessing how they compare to others. First introduced in 1954, this psychological
theory describes the comparison processes people utilize to evaluate their actions,
accomplishments, and opinions in contrast to those of other people.
In psychology, social comparison theory is one explanation for this tendency we have to make
comparisons between ourselves and others. Let’s take a closer look at how social comparison
theory works and how the comparisons we make can influence the views we hold of ourselves.
History of Social Comparison Theory
Social comparison theory was first proposed in 1954 by psychologist Leon Festinger and
suggested that people have an innate drive to evaluate themselves, often in comparison to
others.1 People make all kinds of judgments about themselves, and one of the key ways they
do this is through social comparison or analyzing the self in relation to others.
For example, imagine that a high school student has just signed up for band class to learn how
to play the clarinet. As they evaluate their skills and progress, they compare their performance
to other students in the class.
They might initially compare their abilities to the other members of the clarinet section,
particularly noting those who are better than them, as well as those who are worse. They may
also compare their musical abilities to those of students who play other instruments, even
comparing themselves to the star student of the class.
Psychologist Leon Festinger believed that we engage in this comparison process as a way of
establishing a benchmark by which we can make accurate evaluations of ourselves.
Types of Social Comparison
The social comparison process involves people coming to know themselves by evaluating their
attitudes, abilities, and traits in comparison with others. There are two kinds of social
comparison—upward social comparison and downward social comparison.
a. Upward Social Comparison
Upward comparison takes place when we compare ourselves with those who we believe are
better than or superior to us.2 These comparisons often focus on the desire to improve
ourselves, our current status, or our level of ability. We might compare ourselves to someone
better off and look for ways that we can achieve similar results.
b. Downward Social Comparison
Downward social comparisons are when we compare ourselves to others who are worse off
than us.2 Such comparisons are often centered on making ourselves feel better about our
abilities or traits. We might not be great at something, but at least we are better off than
someone else.
People compare themselves to those who are better when they want inspiration to improve,
and they compare themselves to those who are worse when they want to feel better about
themselves.
When Social Comparisons Are Inaccurate
According to Festinger, people rely on social comparisons to accurately assess their abilities,
traits, and attitudes. In cases where your comparisons are not effective or lead to inaccuracies
in your self-judgment, you might find yourself in situations that are too difficult or complex for
your current skill level.1 Here’s an example.
When you compare yourself to your friends, you might feel that you are physically fit. So, you
sign up for a marathon believing that you can finish with no problem. However, when race day
arrives, you find yourself surrounded by people much more athletic than you, quickly realizing
that your initial assessment of your abilities was overly optimistic.
Impact of Social Comparison
Comparing ourselves to others can be both beneficial and harmful. The difference lies in the
types of comparisons being made, or whether they are upward or downward.
If you want to assess your skill as a basketball player, you might begin comparing your
performance to other people that you know, such as a friend who plays on a school’s
basketball team. This is an example of upward social comparison.
In comparison to them, your performance is not nearly as skilled. At first, you may feel
discouraged by the gap between your ability levels. But you might also realize that you can
eventually achieve a similar skill level with a little practice. In this case, the upward social
comparison may make you more motivated to improve upon your abilities.
Conversely, you might also compare your basketball abilities to a friend who couldn’t make a
basket to save their life. In comparison, your performance is much better. This is an example of
downward social comparison. In this case, observing your friend’s poor skills can make you feel
better about your own abilities.
Some comparisons might make you feel inadequate and less likely to pursue a goal, while
others give you confidence and help boost your self-esteem.3
Takeaways
Social comparison not only plays a role in the judgments that people make about themselves
but also in the way that people behave. As you compare yourself to others, consider how both
upward and downward social comparison might influence your self-belief, confidence,
motivation, and attitude, and watch for negative feelings that might emerge as a result of this
process.
Evolutionary Theory
The evolutionary theory of human interpersonal attraction states that opposite-sex attraction
most often occurs when someone has physical features indicating that he or she is very fertile.
Considering that the primary purpose of conjugal/romantic relationships is reproduction, it
would follow that people invest in partners who appear very fertile, increasing the chance of
their genes being passed down to the next generation
Another evolutionary explanation suggests that fertility in a mate is of greater importance to
men than to women. According to this theory, a woman places significant emphasis on a man’s
ability to provide resources and protection. The theory suggests that these resources and
protection are important in ensuring the successful raising of the woman’s offspring. The
ability to provide resources and protection might also be sought because the underlying traits
are likely to be passed on to male offspring. Evolutionary theory also suggests that people
whose physical features suggest they are healthy are seen as more attractive. The theory
suggests that a healthy mate is more likely to possess genetic traits related to health that
would be passed on to offspring.
Evolutionary theory also suggests that love keeps two people together so that they can raise a
child. Love keeps two people together, and this would help raise a child. For example, a man
and a woman who love each other would be together and work together to raise a child. Back
in the tribal days—when much of human evolution took place—it would probably require two
people to successfully raise an offspring, and a mother with a supporting partner would
probably have more surviving offspring than a mother who does not have such a partner. Thus,
people with the ability to form love would produce more offspring than those without that
ability. And these offspring would have the genes for love. Thus, the genes for love would
become common, and that is why most people today have the ability to love.
DIFFERENT TYPES OF INTERPERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS
Family Relationships- Our family, or relatives are people we are connected to through some
form of kinship, whether it is through blood (such as with parents, brothers and sisters),
marriage (such as non-blood aunts and uncles or step-parents) romantic relationships (such as
a parent’s girlfriend or boyfriend) or adoption. Family includes siblings and parents who you
may see every day growing up, and other relatives such as cousins, aunts, uncles and
grandparents who you may not see quite so frequently. Family relationships are ideally life-
long, although as children become teenagers and then adults, it is usual for them to have more
independence and for the parental relationship to become less one of guidance and more one
of mutual support.
Romantic relationships- Love is one of the most important emotions in our lives. The basic
difference between love and friendship is physical intimacy. Romantic relationships generally
start with affiliation, proximity, and mutual liking. A very important feature of romantic
relationships is interpretation of one’s emotional arousal in the presence of another person as
a strong attraction which includes some potential physical intimacy.
Friendships- Friends are people who we are not related to but choose to interact with. Friends
are people we trust, respect, care about and feel that we can confide in and want to spend
time with. A good friendship should be built on honesty, support and loyalty. A friendship is a
reciprocal relationship; for it to exist, both people must see each other as a friend.
Acquaintances- Acquaintances are people you may encounter regularly, but who are not
friends or relatives. For example, they may be a neighbor who lives in your road that you say
“hello” to if you see them in passing, or a work colleague or someone you have seen a few
times at a social event but do not yet know well. It is important to be polite and respectful to
acquaintances as having harmonious relationships with people around you, such as work
colleagues, people from college, neighbours etc is an important way of avoiding stress or
conflict. In some cases, relationships that start as acquaintanceships can, over time, evolve into
friendships as you get to know the person better and see them more frequently.

Interpersonal Attraction and its Determinants:

Interpersonal Attraction:
Interpersonal attraction refers to the positive feelings, emotions, or attitudes that prompt
individuals to be drawn to one another. It encompasses the desire to establish connections,
form relationships, and engage with others on various levels, ranging from casual friendships
to romantic partnerships. This attraction is often influenced by a combination of factors,
including physical, psychological, social, and situational elements.
At its core, interpersonal attraction involves an individual's inclination or desire to approach,
interact with, and build relationships with specific people. It can be experienced in different
forms, such as:
1. Friendship: Attraction leading to the formation of platonic relationships based on
shared interests, values, or experiences.
2. Romantic Attraction: The desire for emotional and physical intimacy, often leading
to romantic relationships involving love, affection, and partnership.
3. Social Bonds: Attraction that fosters connections within groups, communities, or
social circles, contributing to a sense of belonging and camaraderie.
Interpersonal attraction is influenced by various factors, including physical attractiveness,
similarity, proximity, reciprocity, personality traits, communication styles, and shared
experiences. Different theories in psychology, such as social exchange theory, reinforcement
theory, and evolutionary psychology, attempt to explain the mechanisms behind interpersonal
attraction and the reasons individuals are drawn to specific people.

Determinants of Interpersonal Attraction:

1. Physical Attractiveness: Physical attractiveness is a significant factor in initial attraction.
People are often drawn to others who are perceived as physically attractive.
a. matching phenomenon- The tendency for men and women to choose as partners those
who are a “good match” in attractiveness and other traits.
b. physical-attractiveness stereotype -The presumption that physically attractive people
possess other socially desirable traits as well: What is beautiful is good.
2. Similarity: Individuals are more attracted to those who share similar attitudes, beliefs,
values, interests, and personality traits.
a. DO BIRDS OF A FEATHER FLOCK TOGETHER? Of this much we may be sure: Birds that
flock together are of a feather. Friends, engaged couples, and spouses are far more likely
than randomly paired people to share common attitudes, beliefs, and values.
Furthermore, the greater the similarity between husband and wife, the happier they
are and the less likely they are to divorce.
3. Proximity: Geographical nearness. Proximity (more precisely, “functional distance”)
powerfully predicts liking. Physical proximity increases the likelihood of interaction and fosters
attraction, as individuals have more opportunities to get to know each other.
a. Interaction - INTERACTION Even more significant than geographic distance is “functional
distance”—how often people’s paths cross. We frequently become friends with those
who use the same entrances, parking lots, and recreation areas. Randomly assigned
college roommates, who interact frequently, are far more likely to become good friends
than enemies.
b. Anticipation of interaction- merely anticipating interaction also boosts liking.
Example- A women was given ambiguous information about two other women, one of
whom they expected to talk with intimately. Asked how much they liked each one, the
women preferred the person they expected to meet.
4. Familiarity: Familiarity breeds attraction. People tend to feel more comfortable and
positively disposed toward those they encounter frequently.
5. Reciprocity: Interpersonal attraction is enhanced when it is mutual, and both parties show
interest in each other.
6. Complementarity: Some studies suggest that individuals are attracted to others whose
traits complement their own, creating a sense of balance and completeness.
7. Self-Disclosure: The sharing of personal information fosters intimacy and can lead to
increased attraction.
8. Social Exchange Theory: This theory posits that individuals are attracted to those who
offer rewards or benefits in a relationship, and they aim to minimize costs or negative
outcomes.
Interpersonal attraction is a complex and multi-dimensional phenomenon influenced by
individual preferences, experiences, and various environmental and situational factors. It can
lead to the formation of diverse relationships, from casual friendships to deep romantic
connections, and is a fundamental aspect of social interaction and human behaviour

Add with reward theory

The reward theory also helps explain some of the influences on attraction:
• Proximity is rewarding. It costs less time and effort to receive friendship’s benefits with
someone who lives or works close by.
• We like attractive people because we perceive that they offer other desirable traits and
because we benefit by associating with them.
• If others have similar opinions, we feel rewarded because we presume that they like us in
return. Moreover, those who share our views help validate them. We especially like people if
we have successfully converted them to our way of thinking (Lombardo & others, 1972;
Riordan, 1980; Sigall, 1970).
• We like to be liked and love to be loved. Thus, liking is usually mutual. We like those who like
us.