What Happens When The Reward Outweigh The Hefty Cost

The Social Penetration Theory explains why as relationships develop, communication moves from less intimate levels to more intimate, more personal levelsI can apply this theory to my professional as well as personal

The processes that lead to social order are considered as intricate and premeditated, and not spontaneous. The construction of social order is the result, in reference to Blau’s Exchange Theory, of trust and solidarity achieved through repeated social exchange. This paper will explain how and why social exchange occurs and the significance of continual social exchange between two counterparts.

Kerr’s observation on “The folly of rewarding A while hoping for B is true today, simply illustrates the sometimes fouled up rewards systems that most companies have in place. Fouled up in the sense that most companies wrongly reward not so positive behaviours while hoping and expecting for better ones.

In everyday interactions people are always looking to have a positive experience among those with whom they interact. According to the Social Exchange theory, with each interaction an individual has with another, that individual attempts to maximize the positive outcomes and minimize the negative. The purpose of this paper is to apply the Social Exchange theory to an authentic real life situation to best illustrate the theory and the key concepts that it holds. In applying the social exchange theory from demonstration, to application, to then explanation, a better understanding in

The three modes of exchange are reciprocity, redistribution, and market exchange. These modes of exchange are cross-cultural. Reciprocity is the oldest and most historic method of exchange. Reciprocity is alike many egalitarian societies. One example of these

According to Thibauilt and Kelley (1959), people weigh their costs and benefits of their relationship to determine satisfaction and commitment. Essentially meaning people form relationships in which the incentive is more significant than the action. George Homans summarizes his proposition into three sections: (1) rewards

Social Exchange Theory – Social behavior exchange theory is an exchange between parties as a representative of consent and status (Homans, 1958, p.

The sociological framework consists of several parts. Each piece of the framework interacts with and shapes all the other pieces. The components of the framework include: the social system, culture, social structure, socialization, individuals, and interaction. The social system is comprised of social groups that cohere together to make some kind of whole, in this case gender. The social system is directly shaped by culture, social structure and interaction. Culture is a set of knowledge, beliefs, values, and rules about behavior that are held commonly within a system. This can include language, rituals and practices. Culture also includes norms and roles. Norms are the shared expectations for behavior that predominate in a society. Roles are norms that are attached to specific social positions. Social structure is the organization of a social system in terms of positions and relationships among those positions, as well as the distribution of resources and responsibilities in a social system. Socialization is the process by which a systems culture and social structure are taught and learned. It is also the process through which social systems shape individuals. Individuals are the people within the social system. Individuals shape the social system through interaction. Interaction is the basic idea that following the social system recreates the system as it is, while deviating from the system causes chaos and provides the potential to change the system.

Social-exchange analysis helps define how people socially interact with each other based on cost and benefits associated with interactions. Therefore if the benefits are higher than the cost individuals will likely continue interacting.

Base on my marriage of six-years, my previous marriage and witnessing how my close friends interact in their relationships, I can conclude that I agree and relate to most of the author’s description on Social Exchange Theory. Just like explained in the comparison level, we all believe that we have outcomes that we are entitled to in any relationship we have. (Miller, 2015, p. 177) For example, in my friendships, if I put ‘X’ amount of effort in a friendship, I expect my friend to put the at least the equal amount of effort. I would not consider my happy and successful six-year marriage to have had costs. We have invested so much into our relationship though. Maybe I feel this way due to the fact that I know my wife and I are such a great fit

In the article “The Sexist Truth about Office Romance”, the author explains the phenomenon, reason, and social bias on office romance (Drexle, 2014). Even though “both men and women take part in office romance”, due to the discrimination on women, the society blame more on women than on men for this phenomenon (Drexle, 2014). Generally, women in office romance are motivated by advanced jobs while men are motivated by threatening love and ego. Because employees who are involved in interoffice affairs are targets of office gossip, so most of them have negative opinions toward workplace romance. In addition, women are more sensitive than men, which was caused by gender difference, therefore, “women are more likely to report their negative feelings

When people enter relationships, they bring a lot with them, they bring their version of fairness and the contributions that they or their partner make. Conflict will arise when the given and take in the relationship is no longer equal. Molm, Schaefer, and Collett (2007) noted that the significance of reciprocal exchanges is not limited to the instrumental value of the benefits received, but includes the symbolic social solidarity between the exchange partners that is conveyed in the act of reciprocity. Conflict at its core is when one party or both are unhappy about something or feel like an agreed balance of power is no longer fair. “At one end of the continuum are ‘‘exchange-oriented’’ (EO) individuals, who ‘‘keep score’’ and want to repay their partners for positive or negative actions within the relationship.” (A. M. Bippus). Murstein, Cerreto, and MacDonald thought that different people paid different attention to the costs and benefits that it all came down to the individual. So, while social exchange theory could be felt by some more in conflict than others that this was due to the factor of an individual. This is the core of exchange theory in action when it is a driving factor in a negative way it can lead to new conflicts among a couple’s

During the course of this week’s discussion we will examine the social exchange theory (SET); Dr. Cone did a great job presenting SET to us in this week’s media, I hope you all enjoyed it. Now, we can further consider it by applying the concepts to real life situations such as our family case study, our own family, or other examples you find to be beneficial to you and our collective growth as future APNs. In order to guide our discussion and to have a meaningful learning experience I would encourage each of us to answer the following: What do you find most interesting among the theoretical concepts? Provide a brief patient and family scenario that exemplifies a key concept from the presentation. Discuss whether or not you agree with the ideas presented in this media presentation.

I found the Contingent Rewards concept to be most important to me in Module Three. Recently, I had a feedback/counseling session with one of my work center airman because the airman came to me for guidance after he had issues with his latest Enlisted Performance Report he received from his supervisor. Immediately, we sat down and went through all of his EPRs and line by line on what was good, or bad and why it is viewed that way at my level of supervision. This is where I got into the Contingent Rewards concept where I started to pin point what his intrinsic and extrinsic motivators that are discussed in the motivational theories found in the student reading. Once we established his motivators, we started incorporating the first leadership behavior of setting goals. We established his long term goal was to achieve that promotion statement next EPR cycle. While his short term goal was to master the other three positions that make up a load crew in order to be confident when required to train outside his own position. This short term goal would also enable him to achieve his long term goal. We established that he needed to develop his communication skills. Once the goals were established we moved into ways to meet these goals. I recommended that he start making himself available when the distinguished visitors come through our facility, and that I would include him in those briefings. I also recommended he become a part of the Barksdale’s Best group that represents the base when any distinguished visitor visits the 2d Bomb Wing which would greatly enhance his communication skills while also getting him around other air force specialties that way he would become more diverse airman. Within a few weeks he auditioned for Barksdale’s Best and got the position. Upon hearing of this, I publicly praised him in front of his peers for putting himself out there when he knew he wasn’t the best public speaker. His demeanor changed and became more involved in the work center and valued the importance of what his work center’s role was for the mission. He started reading up on the training manuals and asking more questions to help him understand the positions that he had never physically performed, but he was no longer okay

According the University of Alabama, there are four main social psychology theories about the development of prosocial behavior and altruism. These are social exchange, empathy-altruism, social norms, and evolutionary psychology.