Is it love we’re looking for, or just something tolerable? An emotion sharing common features across cultures might be less of a romantic devotion and more of a search for gratification. Thinking of love in terms of socialization. Why did you or your last significant other end the relationship? Was it because they left their socks all over the place? Did they always forget your date night? Did you consider these qualities a lack of care? Maybe these things are simply intolerable for you. But to others, they are not. Many of our relationships end as a result of conflicting attitudes, behaviors and values.  Social Exchange Theory, coupled with rational Choice Theory and ideas of Erving Goffman, tells us why. Social media tells us how.

“George Homans,” from the article “George C. Homans, the human group and elementary social behaviour,” by Dr. A. Javier Treviño on infed.com

George Homans adapted this theory in the late 1950s, that we base our relationships on a scale of costs versus benefits. When the costs outweigh the benefits, we tend to leave the relationship. People use their comparison levels, by which they compare current relationships to those from the past, and their comparison levels of alternatives, comparing current situations to other available options. These are what help shape our ideas about romantic behaviors. These comparisons come from our schemata, or set of experiences that create our expectations. According to “Romantic Exchanges,” a blog post written by Bradley Wright, social exchange theory suggests that “people think about relationships in terms of various benefits and costs available to them…” and then make choices in their own favor. We make attempts to establish romantic exchanges based on what we think to be worthy of our time and efforts.

Rational choice theory takes these internal monologues and brings them into reality. From available options, one makes a selection based on the shared, consistent schemata of society.  These collective thought processes help individuals make daily decisions. Popular choices typically win the fight. Individuals let these normative behaviors to influence their own choice, which is how we know what others expect of us.

“Erving Goffman,” compliments of ThoughtCo.com, from the article “A Biography of Erving Goffman:
Major Contributions, Education, and Career,” by Ashley Crossman

Erving Goffman says we use these concepts to control perceptions of us. Our front stage is where all that is socially acceptable remains, while the backstage is the opposite. Social exchange theory is what gives us a reason to act in this way, because of our alternative choices. Goffman’s ideas about front and backstage behavior demonstrates the ways in which social media is a prime example of social exchange theory. Let’s look at the social media dating applications, Match.com and Tinder.

Match.com argues that their ultimate goal is “to help singles find the kind of relationship they’re looking for.” This is an obvious example that they’re promoting social exchange theory. They are encouraging members to highlight their best attribute to find the best buyer. The website even has a blog with helpful hints on how to seem more attractive for other online users. Tinder is similar, but not so subtle. They offer a blatant goal: supporting individuality. They offer no suggestions for relationship building. Tinder’s goal “is to allow users to express themselves freely as long as it doesn’t offend others.” This is more obvious in presenting the idea that these websites are a way for people to use edited photographs and conscious dialogues to entice strangers.

In 2015, eighty-five percent of Tinder users claimed to “look after” their appearance on the app, giving in to the collective social schemata. Social exchange theory says that this sense of rational choice is what will guide people in and out of relationships. Match.com and Tinder open the door for rating. With each application, users are picky about not only what they put out there, but also who they continue contact with. They are not obligated to respond to anyone. People take a few short minutes to look at their match and decide whether that person is right for them. Keep in mind that these people are just scratching the surface. They generally know very little about these people they are connecting with.

Each program allows users to designate a set amount of images to their pages and couple them with a description. Both sites reiterate a need to make oneself look attractive by some means. Eighty-four percent of Match users say that they are more selective now than ever of their dating partners, an example of weighing ones options. Match provides more lengthy content, which might mean that its target audience are those people who are looking to engage in something long-term while Tinder is often associated with hook-up culture. This could be the reason that roughly seventy percent of Tinder users also visited other online dating websites in 2015. 

Complements of Pixabay

A few demographics are notable here. First, a small but visible percent of Tinder users are married. Why is this important? These people are benefiting only themselves. even if the couple is in an o[en relationship, the two are still using other people to fulfill needs not met at home. And, people who would initially be monogamous may take on multiple romantic relationships if they feel that their needs are not being entirely met. In a closed relationship, the person is only concerned with their own desire.

“Only 14 percent of boomer women and 22 percent of boomer men…” use Match to marry. These people are seeking a way that they can meet short-term needs, but are open to finding love. We tend to use the social exchange theory very extensively. Online users are very interested in keeping their options open.

These two applications offer participants anonymity and a way to easily filter through comparisons. Rational choice theory tells us how people use such little information to make such a large choice. Individuals purposely create situations where people have to choose swiftly from small amounts of information and, in doing so, lower their chances of someone else finding any bad quality. 

Social Exchange Theory is rich in its possibilities to convey an understanding of social relationship building. Though this article has not discussed all aspects of the theory, we can still see a strong correlation between social exchange theory and how people today search for love.