User talk:2600:1700:7F0:1390:79CD:C233:2994:504C

The introduction section of the article does provide adequate basic knowledge of the social exchange theory. The section covers the definition, contextual and historical background, disciplinary roots, as well as the areas commonly used. The only possible improvement to this section would be a brief description of the methodologies widely used to test and apply this theory for a firmer grip on the concept and any limitations. The strengths of the article are simple and coherent organizational structure and intelligible flow highlighted by well-thought-out contents and links subsections. The weaknesses of the article are an unverified Applications section and introduction section without methodologies. The author can add citations from reliable sources to verify this section, including its subsections, and a few sentences of the methods or practices widely used to test or apply the concept. So far, the Applications section makes sense in that it breaks down the seven key ways the theory is used in the contemporary world. However, this information lacks supportive sources to validate their facts or points. With the addition of reliable sources, the section’s material would certify the theory true uses and become both usable and believable. The Critiques section does offer a substantive critique of the social exchange theory from five renowned social exchange theory professionals, beginning with a deconstructed critique by Miller. Perhaps if dissenting views of the theory from other professionals or counterpoints from proponents of the theory were added, the section’s neutrality could improve. The article adhered to grammatical rules that allowed for an encyclopedic language throughout the article. Sentence structure rules were also observed with proper numbering systems with colon, semi-colon usage, and full sentences for bulleted points. The headings of the sections and subsections also had the appropriate typefaces, as well as correct formatting of footnotes.