ABSTRACT
Social exchange theory is commonly treated as a generalization of economic exchange, where the latter is ideally conceived as exchange in a market. Attention is therefore focused on exchanging like for like, and much of the argument is given over to showing why what one party yields equals in value what the other yields. The result is often an odd distortion of the relationship under study, because that relationship cannot sensibly be seen as a cruder version of a market exchange. The difference between social exchange in general and the ideal type of market exchange is related to the difference between the analysis of collective action in chapters 2 through 7 and the analysis of contract by convention in chapters 10 through 12. Market exchanges and instances of collective action that fit the earlier analysis involve once- only relationships; social exchange and contract by convention involve ongoing relationships. In Ian Macneil’s instructive terms, the former are instances of discrete exchange, the latter of relational exchange. 1
