Forms of Exchange and Integrative Outcomes: Effects of History and Embeddedness

点击翻译按钮获取中文摘要

PI: Linda D. Molm, University of ArizonaTitle: Forms of Exchange and Integrative Outcomes: Effects of History and EmbeddednessSES-0814317Project AbstractAs organizational scholars have shown in richly-detailed ethnographic studies, both the history of exchange relations and the ?embeddedness? of economic exchanges in broader social relationships affect how exchange partners feel about one another, trust one another, and interact with one another. This project brings the rigor of laboratory experimentation and a well developed theory to bear on these complex exchange relations. In two experiments, college student subjects interact with one another via computer in small (3- and 4-actor) structured networks that offer the opportunity to engage in repeated exchanges with alternative partners for points that are converted into money. The first experiment tests how different relationship histories (different sequences of reciprocal and negotiated forms of exchange) affect integrative bonds of trust, regard, and solidarity between exchange partners; the second tests how different relationship contexts (the embedding of one form of exchange within an ongoing relation consisting primarily of the other form) affect these bonds. The project builds on previous work in a decade-long program investigating how different forms of exchange (reciprocal, negotiated, and generalized) affect the development of integrative bonds. That work was the first to establish dramatic differences between forms of exchange existing in isolation from one another; this phase of the program is the first to study complex sequential and concurrent combinations of the two direct exchange forms. The work will extend the reciprocity theory of exchange, increase the relevance of the theory and research for exchanges in natural settings, and strengthen theoretical linkages between the exchange tradition and organizational scholars. The broader impacts of the research are considerable: it would (1) promote the direct participation and education of undergraduate and graduate students in research; (2) facilitate interdisciplinary connections across different levels of analysis (micro, meso, and macro), research methodologies (laboratory experiments and ethnographic research in natural settings), and disciplines (sociology, psychology, economics, management, organizations, business); and (3) address an increasingly important societal question: how to construct social organizations and institutions that enhance trust, community, and solidarity, in order to promote more effective and efficient economic exchanges and more satisfying social relationships.