Editing Social exchange theory (section)

==Critiques==

Katherine Miller outlines several major objections to or problems with the social exchange theory as developed from early seminal works<ref>{{cite book
 | last=Katherine| first=Miller
 | year=2005
 | title=Communication Theories
 | publisher=McGraw Hill
 | location= New York }}{{page needed|date=October 2014}}</ref>
*The theory reduces human interaction to a purely rational process that arises from economic theory.
*The theory favors openness as it was developed in the 1970s when ideas of freedom and openness were preferred, but there may be times when openness isn't the best option in a relationship.
*The theory assumes that the ultimate goal of a relationship is intimacy when this might not always be the case.
*The theory places relationships in a linear structure, when some relationships might skip steps or go backwards in terms of intimacy.

Recent scholars, Russell Cropanzano and Marie S. Mitchell discuss how one of the major issues within the social exchange theory is the lack of information within studies on the various exchange rules.<ref name = Cropanzano/> They suggest that the Social Exchange Theory should include psychological and emotional exchanges which are less visible but just as important.<ref>{{Cite journal |last1=Cropanzano |first1=Russell |last2=Mitchell |first2=Marie S. |date=December 2005 |title=Social Exchange Theory: An Interdisciplinary Review |url=https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/0149206305279602 |journal=Journal of Management |language=en |volume=31 |issue=6 |pages=874–900 |doi=10.1177/0149206305279602 |issn=0149-2063|url-access=subscription }}</ref> Reciprocity is a major exchange rule discussed but, Cropanzano and Mitchell write that the theory would be better understood if more research programs discussed a variety of exchange rules such as [[altruism]], group gain, status consistency and competition.<ref name = Cropanzano/> Meeker points out that within the exchange process, each unit takes into account at least the following elements: reciprocity, rationality, altruism (social responsibility), group gain, status, consistency, and competition (rivalry).<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Walczak |first1=Damian |title=The Process of Exchange, Solidarity and Sustainable Development in Building a Community of Responsibility |journal=Mediterranean Journal of Social Sciences |date=1 January 2015 |doi=10.5901/mjss.2015.v6n1s1p506 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref>{{cite journal | last1 = Meeker | first1 = B. F. | year = 1971 | title = Decisions and exchange | journal = American Sociological Review | volume = 36 | issue = 3| pages = 485–495 | doi=10.2307/2093088| jstor = 2093088 }}</ref>

Rosenfeld (2005) has noted significant limitations to Social Exchange Theory and its application in the selection of mates/partners. Specifically, Rosenfeld looked at the limitations of interracial couples and the application of social exchange theory. His analysis suggest that in modern society, there is less of a gap between interracial partners education level, socioeconomic status, and social class level which in turn, makes the previously understood application of social exchange moot.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Rosenfeld |first1=Michael J. |title=A Critique of Exchange Theory in Mate Selection |journal=American Journal of Sociology |date=March 2005 |volume=110 |issue=5 |pages=1284–1325 |doi=10.1086/428441 |s2cid=144410320 }}</ref>