Building a Life Together: Reciprocal and Negotiated Exchange in Fragile Families

Collett, Jessica L.; Avelis, Jade

doi:10.1108/s0882-6145(2011)0000028011

Cited by 6 publications

(8 citation statements)

References 22 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A sense of mutual control over the collaborative production of a shared benefit should also be coupled with perceived jointness of task and an associated sense of shared responsibility, which affect theory predicts will build social bonds (Lawler 2001; Lawler et al 2008). Additional social exchange research further supports the link between jointness of task and social bonds (Collett and Avelis 2011; Kuwabara 2011).…”

Section: The Structure Of Generalized Generosity: Building Bonds Through Generalized-productive Exchangementioning

confidence: 73%

Generalized Generosity: How the Norm of Generalized Reciprocity Bridges Collective Forms of Social Exchange

Whitham

2021

Am Sociol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines the potential for small-scale acts of giving that are not directly reciprocated, or generalized generosities, to build social bonds and promote contributions to the group. Social exchange theorists define such acts as generalized exchange. The potential for generalized exchange to build strong social bonds relative to other forms of exchange is the subject of theoretical debate. In this article, I build on two prominent theories of social exchange—affect theory and the theory of reciprocity—to propose that a strong norm of generalized reciprocity may bridge the connective benefits of generalized exchange with the connective benefits of productive exchange, which is a collaborative form of social exchange that involves sharing pooled resources. I argue that a strong norm of generalized reciprocity will activate mechanisms theorized to build strong social bonds in generalized and productive exchange systems, and will promote additional behavioral investments into the group. I test my argument with a controlled laboratory experiment, finding strong support for the proposed causal model. The results of this study have implications for research on generosity, collective action, collaboration, sense of community, and social capital.

show abstract

Section: The Structure Of Generalized Generosity: Building Bonds Through Generalized-productive Exchangementioning

confidence: 73%

Generalized Generosity: How the Norm of Generalized Reciprocity Bridges Collective Forms of Social Exchange

Whitham

2021

Am Sociol Rev

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Men with specific standards for fatherhood generate greater commitment to the identity as they work to live up to expectations and experience success (Collett and Avelis 2011). As noted previously, when Jayden pushes harder and puts in more effort, he fosters positive relationships with his partner and children and enhances his commitment to fatherhood.…”

Section: Effects Of Specificitymentioning

confidence: 99%

Using Identity Processes to Understand Persistent Inequality in Parenting

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Despite growing acceptance of a ''new fatherhood'' urging fathers to be engaged in family life, men's relative contributions to housework and child care have remained largely stagnant over the past twenty years. Using data from in-depth interviews, we describe how identity processes may contribute to this persistent inequality in parenting. We propose that the specificity of men's identity standards for the father role is related to role-relevant behavior, and that the vague expectations many associate with ''new fatherhood'' both contribute to and result from men's underinvolvement. Consistent with this proposal, we find that while all fathers face difficulty living up to expectations of ''new fatherhood,'' those with vague identity standards contribute less to carework and are less committed to the father identity, in part because they are less likely to experience self-discrepancy. We outline the implications of our results for future research in identity theory and for understanding inequality in households.

show abstract

“…They find that those forms of exchange that more closely resemble gift giving result in stronger dyadic bonds than those that more closely reflect market-based exchanges (Kuwabara 2011). This is consequential given the prevalence of both reciprocity and negotiation in the real world (for accounts of reciprocal exchange among contractors in the New York garment industry, see Uzzi 1997 or Moore 1978; for accounts of negotiated exchanges over contracts in college coaching, see Greenberg 1991; for descriptions of families that differ in the use of either reciprocal or negotiated exchange, see Collett and Avelis 2011).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Similarly, our research may help explain the persistence or dissolution of marriages and families. Collett and Avelis (2011) reveal that exchange patterns in families tend to be dominated by either reciprocity or negotiation. We therefore can surmise that low power family members will be more likely to sever ties in families characterized by negotiation.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Should I Stay or Should I Go? Reciprocity, Negotiation, and the Choice of Structurally Disadvantaged Actors to Remain in Networks

Savage

Sommer

2016

Soc Psychol Q

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing on existing theories of social exchange as well as self-categorization theory, we consider how two forms of direct exchange influence whether structurally disadvantaged actors choose to stay in the micro-structures that disadvantage them. We posit that (1) the exit opportunity is more likely to result in disadvantaged actors coming to view their network as a group if there has been a history of reciprocal, as opposed to negotiated, exchange and (2) this psychological group formation should account for disadvantaged actors disproportionately choosing to remain in reciprocal exchange networks. We also consider whether the information actors have about the alternative network affects this choice. Findings from two laboratory experiments generally support our argument that for disadvantaged actors, psychological group formation mediates the relationship between exchange form and staying in networks.

show abstract

Building a Life Together: Reciprocal and Negotiated Exchange in Fragile Families

Cited by 6 publications

References 22 publications

Generalized Generosity: How the Norm of Generalized Reciprocity Bridges Collective Forms of Social Exchange

Generalized Generosity: How the Norm of Generalized Reciprocity Bridges Collective Forms of Social Exchange

Using Identity Processes to Understand Persistent Inequality in Parenting

Should I Stay or Should I Go? Reciprocity, Negotiation, and the Choice of Structurally Disadvantaged Actors to Remain in Networks

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About