社会交換理論
Social exchange theory
社会交換理論
Social exchange theory
★社会的交換理論とは、リ
スクと利益を決定するために費用便益分析を実施する二者の相互作用における社会的行動を研究する社会学および心理学の理論である。この理論
は経済的な関係も含んでおり、各当事者が相手にとって価値のある財を持っている場合に費用便益分析が行われる。社会交換理論は、こうした計算が恋愛関係、
友人関係、職業関係、レジで客と言葉を交わすような単純ではかない関係で行われるとする。社会交換理論は、多くの努力や金銭が関係において注がれたがそれ
に応えない場合、その関係のコストが報酬より大きい場合は関係が終了または放棄されるという。このように、関係におけるコストはリターンを上回り、その関
係が終了する場合もあるとされる。
| Social exchange
theory is a sociological and psychological theory that studies the
social behavior in the interaction of two parties that implement a
cost-benefit analysis to determine risks and benefits. The theory also
involves economic relationships—the cost-benefit analysis occurs when
each party has goods that the other parties value.[1] Social exchange
theory suggests that these calculations occur in romantic
relationships, friendships, professional relationships, and ephemeral
relationships as simple as exchanging words with a customer at the cash
register.[2] Social exchange theory says that if the costs of the
relationship are higher than the rewards, such as if a lot of effort or
money were put into a relationship and not reciprocated, then the
relationship may be terminated or abandoned.[3] |
社会的交換理論とは、リスクと利益を決定するために費用便益分析を実施
する二者の相互作用における社会的行動を研究する社会学および心理学の理論である[1]。この理論は経済的な関係も含んでおり、各当事者が相手にとって価
値のある財を持っている場合に費用便益分析が行われる[1]。社会交換理論は、こうした計算が恋愛関係、友人関係、職業関係、レジで客と言葉を交わすよう
な単純ではかない関係で行われるとする[2]。社会交換理論は、多くの努力や金銭が関係において注がれたがそれに応えない場合、その関係のコストが報酬よ
り大きい場合は関係が終了または放棄されるという。[3]
このように、関係におけるコストはリターンを上回り、その関係が終了する場合もあるとされる[4]。 |
| The most comprehensive social
exchange theories are those of the American social psychologists John
W. Thibaut (1917–1986) and Harold H. Kelley (1921–2003), the American
sociologists George C. Homans (1910–1989), Peter M. Blau (1918–2002),
Richard Marc Emerson (d. 1982), and Claude Lévi-Strauss (1908–2009).[1]
Homans defined social exchange as the exchange of activity, tangible or
intangible, and more or less rewarding or costing between at least two
persons.[4] After Homans founded the theory, other theorists continued
to write about it, particularly Peter M. Blau and Richard M. Emerson,
who in addition to Homans are generally thought of as the major
developers of the exchange perspective within sociology.[5] Homans'
work emphasized the individual behavior of actors in interaction with
one another. Although there are various modes of exchange, Homans
centered his studies on dyadic exchange.[6] John Thibaut and Harold
Kelley are recognized for focusing their studies within the theory on
the psychological concepts, the dyad and small group.[7] Lévi-Strauss
is recognized for contributing to the emergence of this theoretical
perspective from his work on anthropology focused on systems of
generalized exchange, such as kinship systems and gift exchange.[6] |
最も包括的な社会的交換理論はアメリカの社会心理学者ジョン・W・チ
ボー（1917-1986）とハロルド・H・ケリー（1921-2003）、アメリカの社会学者ジョージ・C・ホーマンズ（1910-1989）、ピー
ター・M・ブラウ（1918-2002）、リチャード・マーク・エマーソン（1982没）とクロード・レヴィ＝ストロス（1908-2009）による理論
です [1] ホーマンズは社会的交換とは少なくとも2人間の有形・無形の、多少なり報償や費用がかかる活動交換と定義しました[4] 。
[ホーマンズが理論を確立した後、他の理論家がそれについて書き続け、特にピーター・M・ブラウとリチャード・M・エマーソンは、ホーマンズに加えて、社
会学における交換視点の主要な開発者と一般的に考えられている[5]。
ホーマンズの仕事は、互いに相互作用する行為者の個々の行動を強調した。レヴィ＝ストロースは親族制度や贈与交換といった一般化された交換のシステムに焦
点を当てた人類学の研究から、この理論的視点の出現に貢献したと認識されている[7]。 |
| Thibaut and Kelley Thibaut and Kelley based their theory on small groups related with dyadic relationships. They used the reward-cost matrices from Game Theory and discovered some clues of individuals’ interdependence such as the power of a party over each other, also known as the “correspondence” versus “noncorrespondence” of outcomes. Additionally, they suggest that an individual can unilaterally affect her or his own outcomes in a relationship through chosen behaviors. They could predict the possible course of a social interaction through the analysis of aspects of power in an encounter. They also experimented on how the outcomes received in a relationship could define a person's attractions to relationships.[1] |
|
| Homans Homans based his theory on concepts of equilibration, expectancy and distributive justice in dyadic exchange. With this, he tries to explain the social interaction in small groups and the rewards received proportional to their costs and investments. Homans summarizes the system in three propositions: success, stimulus, and deprivation–satiation proposition,[7] described below. Success proposition: When one finds they are rewarded for their actions, they tend to repeat the action. Stimulus proposition: The more often a particular stimulus has resulted in a reward in the past, the more likely it is that a person will respond to it. Deprivation–satiation proposition: The more often in the recent past a person has received a particular reward, the less valuable any further unit of that reward becomes. |
|
| Blau Blau's theory is very similar to Homans’. However, he uses more economics terms and it is based principally on emergent social structure in social exchange patterns in small groups.[1] His theory analyzes the development of exchange theory in economics without emphasizing on the psychological assumptions. He contributed to the idea of distinguishing between social and economic exchanges and exchange and power. The goal of his theory was to identify complex and simple processes without ignoring emergent properties.[8] Blau's utilitarian focus encouraged the theorist to look forward, as in what they anticipated the reward would be in regards to their next social interaction.[6] Blau felt that if individuals focused too much on the psychological concepts within the theory, they would refrain from learning the developing aspects of social exchange.[7] Blau emphasized technical economic analysis whereas Homans concentrated more on the psychology of instrumental behavior.[7] |
|
| Emerson Emerson was inspired by Homans and Blau's ideas. He focused on the interaction and relationship between individuals and parties. His view of social exchange theory emphasizes the resource availability, power, and dependence as primary dynamics. He thought that relations were organized in different manners, and they could differ depending on the type and amount of the resources exchanged. He poses the idea that power and dependence are the main aspects that define a relationship.[9] According to Emerson, Exchange is not a theory, but a framework from which other theories can converge and be compared to structural functionalism.[7] Emerson's perspective was similar to Blau's since they both focused on the relationship power had with the exchange process.[6] Emerson says that social exchange theory is an approach in sociology that is described for simplicity as an economic analysis of noneconomic social situations.[7] Exchange theory brings a quasi-economic form of analysis into those situations.[7] |
|
| Lévi-Strauss Strauss was a social exchange theorist in the context of anthropology. He is recognized for contributing to the emergence of this theoretical perspective from his work on anthropology focused on systems of generalized exchange, such as kinship systems and gift exchange. He based his kinship systems on Mauss's investigation. As it works in the form of indirect reciprocities, Levi-Strauss suggested the concept of generalized exchange.[10] |
|
| Self-interest and interdependence Self-interest and interdependence are central properties of social exchange.[11] These are the basic forms of interaction when two or more actors have something of value to each other, and they have to decide whether to exchange and in what amounts.[12] Homans uses the concepts of individualism to explain exchange processes. To him, the meaning of individual self-interest is a combination of economic and psychological needs.[13] Fulfilling self-interest is often common within the economic realm of the social exchange theory where competition and greed can be common.[14] In social exchange, self-interest is not a negative thing; rather, when self-interest is recognized, it will act as the guiding force of interpersonal relationships for the advancement of both parties' self-interest"—Michael Roloff (1981)[15] Thibaut and Kelley see the mutual interdependence of persons as the central problem for the study of social behavior. They developed a theoretical framework based on the interdependence of actors. They also highlighted social implications of different forms of interdependence such as reciprocal control.[16] According to their interdependence definition, outcomes are based on a combination of parties' efforts and mutual and complementary arrangements.[6] |
|
| Basic concepts Social exchange theory views exchange as a social behavior that may result both in economic and social outcomes.[17] Social exchange theory has been generally analyzed by comparing human interactions with the marketplace. The study of the theory from the microeconomics perspective is attributed to Blau.[6] Under his perspective every individual is trying to maximize his wins. Blau stated that once this concept is understood, it is possible to observe social exchanges everywhere, not only in market relations, but also in other social relations like friendship.[18] Social exchange process brings satisfaction when people receive fair returns for their expenditures. The major difference between social and economic exchange is the nature of the exchange between parties. Neoclassic economic theory views the actor as dealing not with another actor but with a market and environmental parameters, such as market price.[19] Unlike economic exchange, the elements of social exchange are quite varied and cannot be reduced to a single quantitative exchange rate.[20] According to Stafford, social exchanges involve a connection with another person; involve trust and not legal obligations; are more flexible; and rarely involve explicit bargaining.[21] Cost and rewards Simple social exchange models assume that rewards and costs drive relationship decisions.[20] Both parties in a social exchange take responsibility for one another and depend on each other. The elements of relational life include: Costs are the elements of relational life that have negative value to a person, such as the effort put into a relationship and the negatives of a partner.[22] (Costs can be time, money, effort etc.) Rewards are the elements of a relationship that have positive value. (Rewards can be sense of acceptance, support, and companionship etc.) As with everything dealing with the social exchange theory, it has as its outcome satisfaction and dependence of relationships. The social-exchange perspective argues that people calculate the overall worth of a particular relationship by subtracting its costs from the rewards it provides.[23] Worth = Rewards − Costs If worth is a positive number, it is a positive relationship. On the contrary, a negative number indicates a negative relationship. The worth of a relationship influences its outcome, or whether people will continue with a relationship or terminate it. Positive relationships are expected to endure, whereas negative relationships will probably terminate. In a mutually beneficial exchange, each party supplies the wants of the other party at lower cost to self than the value of the resources the other party provides. In such a model, mutual relationship satisfaction ensures relationship stability.[20] Outcome = Rewards − Costs Homans based his theory on behaviorism to conclude that people pursue rewards to minimize costs. The "satisfactory-ness" of the rewards that a party gains from an exchange relationship is judged relative to some standard, which may vary from party to party.[17] Reciprocity Norm Summarized by Gouldner, the reciprocity norm states that a benefit should be returned and the one who gives the benefit should not be harmed. This is used to stabilize relationships and to identify egoism. This norm suggests independence in relationships and invite the individual to consider more than one's self-interest.[24] The Social Penetration Theory Altman and D. Taylor introduced social penetration theory, which studies the nature and quality of social exchange and close bonds. It suggests that once the individuals start to give more of their resources to one another, relationships evolve progressively from exchanging superficial goods to other, more meaningful exchanges. It progresses to the point called “self-disclosure”, where the individuals share innermost thoughts and feelings with one another.[24] Equity and inequity In this process, the individuals will compare their rewards with others’ in relation to their costs. Equity can be defined as the balance between a person's inputs and outcomes on the job. Some examples of inputs can be qualifications, promotions, interest on the job and how hard one works. Some outcomes can be pay, fringe benefits, and power status. The individual will mainly expect an equitable input-outcome ratio. Inequity happens when the individual perceives an unbalanced ratio of their outcomes and other's outcomes. This can occur in a direct exchange of the two parties, or there can be a third party involved. An individual's point of view of equity or inequity can differ depending on the individual.[24] |
基本的な概念 社会的交換理論は交換を経済的・社会的成果の両方をもたらす可能性のある社会的行動として見ています[17]。社会的交換理論は一般的に人間の相互作用と 市場を比較することによって分析されてきました。ミクロ経済学の視点からのこの理論の研究はブラウに起因している[6]。彼の視点の下では、すべての個人 が自分の勝利を最大化しようとしているのである。ブラウはこの概念が理解されれば、市場関係だけでなく、友情のような他の社会的関係においても社会的交換 をどこでも観察することが可能になると述べている[18] 社会的交換プロセスは人々が支出に対して公正なリターンを受け取る際に満足をもたらす。社会的交換と経済的交換の間の大きな違いは、当事者間の交換の性質 である。新古典派経済理論は行為者を他の行為者ではなく、市場や市場価格などの環境パラメータと取引しているとみなす[19]。経済的交換とは異なり、社 会的交換の要素は非常に多様で、単一の定量的交換率に還元することはできない[20]。 スタフォードによれば、社会的交換は他の人とのつながりを含み、法的義務ではなく信頼を伴い、より柔軟で、明確な交渉はほとんど伴わない[21]。 コストと報酬 単純な社会的交換モデルは報酬とコストが関係性の決定を促すと仮定している[20]。社会的交換の両当事者はお互いに対して責任を持ち、依存し合ってい る。関係性生活の要素には コストとは人間関係に費やした努力や相手のマイナス面など、人にとってマイナスの価値を持つ関係生活の要素である[22]（コストは時間、お金、努力など であることがある）。 報酬とは、人間関係においてプラスの価値を持つ要素である。(報酬は受容、サポート、交友などの感覚である。） 社会的交換理論を扱うすべてのものと同様に、それは関係の満足と依存をその成果としている。社会的交換の視点は、人々はそれが提供する報酬からそのコスト を差し引くことによって特定の関係の全体的な価値を計算すると主張している[23]。 価値＝報酬-コスト 価値が正の数である場合、それは肯定的な関係である。逆に、マイナスの数値であれば、マイナスの関係であることを示しています。関係の価値は、その結果、 すなわち人々が関係を継続するか終了させるかに影響を与える。肯定的な関係は持続することが期待され、否定的な関係はおそらく終了する。互恵的交換では、 各当事者は、相手方が提供する資源の価値よりも低い自己コストで相手方の欲求を供給します。このようなモデルでは、相互の関係満足が関係の安定性を保証す る[20]。 成果＝報酬-コスト ホーマンズは行動主義に基づく理論で、人はコストを最小化するために報酬を追求すると結論付けた。交換関係から当事者が得る報酬の「満足度」は、当事者に よって異なる可能性のある何らかの基準に照らして判断される[17]。 互恵性規範 グールドナーによって要約された互恵性規範は、利益が還元されるべきであり、利益を与えた者が害されるべきではないとするものである。これは人間関係を安 定させ、エゴイズムを識別するために使われる。この規範は人間関係における独立性を示唆し、個人が自己の利益以上のことを考慮するように促す[24]。 社会的浸透理論 アルトマンとD.テイラーは社会的交換と緊密な結びつきの性質と質について研究する社会的浸透理論を導入した。それは、いったん個人が互いに資源をより多 く提供し始めると、関係は表面的な財の交換から他の、より意味のある交換へと漸進的に進化することを示唆している。それは、個人が互いに心の奥底にある考 えや感情を共有する「自己開示」と呼ばれる点まで進展する[24]。 衡平性と不公正性 このプロセスでは、個人はコストとの関係で自分の報酬を他人と比較することになる。衡平性とは、仕事における個人のインプットと成果のバランスと定義する ことができる。インプットの例としては、資格、昇進、仕事への関心、努力の度合いなどがあります。成果には、給与、福利厚生、権力的地位などがある。個人 は主に、インプットとアウトカムの比率が公平であることを期待します。不公平は、個人が自分の成果と他の成果の比率が不均衡であると認識したときに起こり ます。これは、両者の直接的な交換で起こることもあれば、第三者が関与している場合もある。個人の公平・不公平の視点は、個人によって異なることがある [24]。 |
| Aging The basis of social exchange theory is to explain social change and stability as a process of negotiating exchanges between parties. These changes can occur over a person's life course through the various relationships, opportunities, and means of support. An example of this is the convoy model of support, this model uses concentric circles to describe relationships around an individual with the strongest relationships in the closet circle. As a person ages, these relationships form a convoy that moves along with the person and exchanges in support and assistance through different circumstances that occur.[25] It also changes through the directionality of support given to and by the individual with the people within their support network. Within this model, there are different types of support (Social support) a person can receive, those being intangible, tangible, instrumental, and informational. Intangible support can either be social or emotional and can be love, friendship and appreciation that comes with valuable relationships. Tangible support are physical gifts given to someone such as land, gifts, money, transportation, food, and completing chores. Instrumental support are services given to someone in a relationship. Finally, informational support is the delivering of information that is helpful to an individual.[26] |
エイジング 社会的交換理論の基本は、社会の変化と安定を当事者間の交換交渉の過程として説明することである。このような変化は、様々な人間関係、機会、支援の手段を 通じて、人のライフコースに渡って起こる可能性があります。このモデルは、同心円を使って、個人の周りの人間関係を表現し、最も強い人間関係はクローゼッ トサークルにある。人が年をとるにつれて、これらの関係は、人とともに移動する護送船団を形成し、発生するさまざまな状況を通じて支援と援助の交換を行 う。このモデルでは、人が受けることができる支援（社会的支援）には、無形、有形、道具的、情報的という異なる種類がある。無形の支援とは、社会的または 感情的なもので、貴重な人間関係から得られる愛、友情、感謝などである。有形支援とは、土地、贈り物、お金、交通手段、食べ物、家事の完了など、誰かに与 えられる物理的な贈り物のことである。道具的な支援とは、人間関係の中で誰かに与えられるサービスのことである。最後に、情報的支援とは、個人にとって有 益な情報を届けることである[26]。 |
| Anthropology Other applications that developed the idea of exchange include field of anthropology as evidenced in an article by Harumi Befu, which discusses cultural ideas and norms. Lévi-Strauss is considered as one of the major contributors to the anthropology of exchange. Within this field, self-interest, human sentiment and motivational process are not considered.[40] Lévi–Strauss uses a collectivist approach to explain exchanges. To Lévi-Strauss, a social exchange is defined as a regulated form of behavior in the context of societal rules and norms. This contrasts with psychological studies of exchange in which behaviors are studied ignoring the culture. Social exchanges from the anthropological perspective have been analyzed using the gift-giving phenomena. The concept of reciprocity under this perspective states that individuals can directly reward his benefactor or another person in the social exchange process.[52] Lévi-Strauss developed the theory of cousin marriage based on the pervasiveness of gift-giving in primitive societies. The basis of this theory is the distinction between restricted exchanges, which is only capable of connecting pairs of social groups, and generalize exchange, which integrates indefinite numbers of groups.[40] |
人類学 交換の概念を発展させた他の応用分野としては、文化的な考え方や規範を論じた別府春海の論文に見られるように、人類学の分野も含まれる。レヴィ＝ストロー スは、交換の人類学に大きく貢献した一人であると考えられている。この分野の中では、利己心、人間の感情、動機づけのプロセスは考慮されていない [40]。レヴィ＝ストロースは交換を説明するために集団主義的なアプローチを使われている。レヴィ＝ストロースにとって、社会的交換は社会的なルールや 規範の文脈における規制された行動の形態として定義されている。これは、行動を文化を無視して研究する交換の心理学的研究とは対照的である。人類学的な視 点からの社会的交換は、贈与現象を使って分析されてきた。この視点における互酬性の概念は、社会的交換プロセスにおいて個人が恩人や他の人に直接報酬を与 えることができると述べている[52] レヴィ＝ストロースは原始社会における贈与の浸透性に基づいていとこ婚の理論を構築した。この理論の基礎は社会集団のペアを結ぶことしかできない制限的交 換と不特定多数の集団を統合する一般化交換の区別にある[40]。 |
| https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Social_exchange_theory |
+++
Links
リンク
文献
その他の情報
