Clark and Mills claim that communal and exchange relationships differ in the rules that govern giving and receiving benefits. In exchange relationships, members benefit each other to incur or repay obligation, quid pro quo. In communal relationships, the basis of benefit is concern for the other's welfare. Response by Clark and Mills to three criticism suggests, however that the psychological difference they see between communal and exchange relationships is less than might be imagined. They say that benefits in communal relationships may be bestowed with an eye to gaining self-benefits, including (a) the social and self-rewards for fulfilling one's role obligations and (b) the benefits received from the partner in the form of having one's needs met or establishing a rewarding relationship. If this is true, then quid pro quo exchange principles seem to operate in both communal and exchange relationships; the difference is in the breadth and etiquette of benefits exchanged.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
Altman, I. , & Taylor, D. A. (1973). Social penetration The development of interpersonal relationships. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
2.
Berscheid, E. (1983). Emotion. In H. H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A. Christensen, J. H. Harvey, T. L. Huston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L A Peplau, & D. R. Peterson, Close relationships (pp. 110-168). New York: W. H. Freeman.
3.
Blau, P. M. (1955). The dynamics of bureaucracy: A study of interpersonal relations in two government agencies. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.
4.
Blau, P. M. (1964) . Exchange and power in social life. New York: John Wiley.
5.
Brown, R. (1986). Social psychology (2nd ed.). New York: Free Press.
6.
Burgess, R. L. , & Huston, T. L. (Eds.). (1979). Social exchange in developing relationships. New York: Academic Press.
7.
Clark, M. S. (1984). Record keeping in two types of relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 47, 549-557.
8.
Clark, M. S. (1986). Evidence for the effectiveness of manipulations of desire for communal versus exchange relationships. Personality and Social Psychology Bulltin, 12, 414-425.
9.
Clark, M. S. , & Mills, J. (1979). Interpersonal attraction in exchange and communal relationships. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 37, 12-24.
10.
Clark, M. S. , Mills, J., & Corcoran, D. (1989). Keeping track of need and inputs of friends and strangers. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 15, 533-542.
11.
Clark, M. S. , Mills, J., & Powell, M. C. (1986). Keeping track of needs in communal and exchange relationships. Journal of Pesonality and Social Psychology, 51, 333-338.
12.
Clark, M. S. , Ouellette, R., Powell, M. C., & Milberg, S. (1987). Recipient's mood, relationship type, and helping. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 53, 94-103.
13.
Clark, M. S. , & Reis, H. T. (1988). Interpersonal processes in dose relationships. Annual Review of Psychology, 39, 609-672.
14.
Deutsch, M. (1975). Equity, equality, and need: What determines which will be used as the basis of distributive justice?Journal of Social issues, 31, 137-149.
15.
Duck, S. (Ed.). (1988). Handbook of personal relationships: Theory, relationships, and interventions. New York: John Wiley.
16.
Fromm, E. (1956). The art of loving. New York: Harper & Row.
17.
Hatfield, E. , & Traupmann, J. (1980). Intimate relationships: A perspective from equity theory. In S. Duck & R. Gilmour (Eds.), Personal relationships: Studying personal relationships (pp. 165-178). New York: Academic Press.
18.
Hatfield, E. , Traupmann, J., Sprecher, S., Utne, M., & Hay, J. (1985). Equity and intimate relations: Recent research. In W. Ickes (Ed.), Compatible and incompatible relationships (pp. 91-117). New York: Springer-Verlag.
19.
Heider, F. (1958). The psychology of interpersonal relations. New York: John Wiley.
20.
Homans, G. C. (1961). Social behavior. New York: Harcourt, Brace, and World.
21.
Hornstein, H. A. (1982). Promotive tension: Theory and research. In V. J. Derlega & J. Grzelak (Eds.), Cooperation and helping behavior: Theories and reah (pp. 229-248). New York: Academic Press.
22.
Huesmann, L. R. , & Levinger, G. (1976). Incremental exchange theory: A formal model for progression in dyadic social interaction. In L. Berkowitz (Ed.), Advances in experimental social psychology (Vol. 9, pp. 191-229). New York: Academic Press.
23.
Huston, T. L. (1983). Power. In H. H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A. Christensen, J. H. Harvey, T. L. Huston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L A. Peplau, & D. R. Peterson (1983), Close relationships (pp. 169-219). New York: W. H. Freeman.
24.
Jones, E. E. (1964). IngratiationNew York: Appleton-Century-Crofts.
25.
Kelley, H. H. (1983). Love and commitment. In H. H. Kelley, E. Berscheid, A. Christensen, J. H. Harvey, T. L Huston, G. Levinger, E. McClintock, L A. Peplau, & D. R. Peterson (1983), Close relationships (pp. 265-314). New York: W. H. Freeman.
26.
Kelley, H. H.Berscheid, E. , Christensen, A., Harvey, J. H., Huston, T. L., Levinger, G., McClintock, E., Peplau, L. A., & Peterson, D. R. (1983). Close relationships. New York: W. H. Freeman.
27.
Lerner, M. J. (1982). The justice motive in human relations and the economic model of man: A radical analysis of facts and fictions. In V. J. Derlega & J. Grzelak (Eds.), Cooperation and helping behavior: Theories and research (pp. 249-278). New York: Academic Press.
28.
Levinger, G. , & Rausch, H. L. (Eds.). (1977). Close relationships. Amherst: University of Massachusetts Press.
29.
Levinger, G. , & Snoek, J. D. (1972). Attraction in relationship: A new look at interpersonal attraction. Morristown, NJ: General Learning Press.
30.
Mills, J. , & Clark, M. S. (1982). Communal and exchange relationships. Review of Personality and Social Psychology, 3, 121-144.
31.
Mills, J. , & Clark, M. S. (1988, July). Communal and exchange relationships: New research and old controversies. Invited address at the biannual meeting of the International Society for the Study of Personal Relationships, Vancouver, B. C.
32.
Pruitt, D. G. (1972). Methods for resolving differences of interest A theoretical analysis. Journal of Social Issues, 28, 133-154.
33.
Rubin, Z. (1973). Liking and loving: An invitation to social psychology. New York: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.
34.
Sager, C. (1976). Marriage contracts and couple therapy. New York: Brunner/Maze.
35.
Shaver, P. , Hazan, C., & Bradshaw, D. (1988). Love as attachment The integration of three behavioral systems. In R. J. Sternberg & M. L. Barnes (Eds.), The psychology of love (pp. 68-99). New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
36.
Tajfel, H. (1978). Social categorization, social identity, and social comparison. In H. Tajfel (Ed.), Differentiation between social groups (pp. 61-76). New York: Academic Press.
37.
Tedeschi, J. T. (1974). Attributions, liking, and power. In R. L. Burgess & T. L Huston (Eds.), Foundations of interpersonal attraction (pp. 193-215). New York: Academic Press.
38.
Thibaut, J. W. , & Kelley, H. H. (1959). The social psychology of groups. New York: John Wiley.
39.
Walster, E. , Berscheid, E., & Walster, G. W. (1973). New directions in equity research. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 25, 151-176.
40.
Walster, E. , Walster, G. W., & Berscheid, E. (1978). Equity: Theory and research. Boston: Allyn & Bacon.
41.
Wlliamson, G. M. , & Clark, M. S. (1989). Effects of providing help to another and of relationship type on the provider's mood and self-evaluation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 56, 722-734.
42.
Wlliamson, G. M. , & Clark, M. S. (1992). Impact of desired relationship type on affective reactions to choosing and being required to help. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin18, 10-18.
