For instance, a woman may be offered a new job in another town beginning in a week. She badly needs to sell her car before moving to make some money and because it will not be needed in the next position. The automobile is nearly new and it originally cost $22,000. Her neighbor offers her $10,000, which she grudgingly accepts because there is no other choice. The neighbor is taking advantage of her situation and showing an example of negative reciprocity. he/she has gotten the upper hand and gained something in the exchange. In many situations, negative reciprocity if a form of power or control. It obligates one person to another. Over the past several decades, two major trends have occurred in gift-giving. The first is the rapid commercialization of the events during the year. The second is that the social networks have changed from family to friends to business associates and employers.

The majority of the holidays celebrated today did not exist more than 150 years ago, yet presently most people feel obligated by these events and it is necessary to share gift-giving with family and friends. Recently, this has extended to other people, as well, who are known but not closely attached. As a result, major companies have increasingly addressed this need, which has further placed an importance on the events and gift-giving. Further, people used to believe that it was the thought, not the gift, that counted. In fact, cards were exchanged instead of gifts at the holidays.

The approaching holiday season will bring out the best, and worst, in many people. In a positive reciprocity respect, gifts will be given to friends and families in a generalized manner. Individuals will offer presents with no expectations that something of similar value or even anything at all will be given in return. The present will be given as an act of kindness. Similarly, many gifts will be given in a balanced way. That is, family members...

All parties will be pleased that they received a gift (even if it was something they never wanted!)
However, there is a form of negative gift-giving that seems to be growing along with commercialization of the holidays. That is feeling that one is obligated to give something bigger than something received by someone else. When people know that a person is going to give them a gift, they feel constrained to provide something in return -- and, in many cases, something more costly or rare. The following year, the gifts exchanged will have to be even better.

or, people give a gift (who probably would not have given a present) to assume a type of power or a sense of obligation over that person. (for example, when a person at a large family or workplace holiday gathering gives a present to someone who has nothing to give back.) Now the recipient of the gift has to do something in return. This establishes a tradition -- next year, that person will get a gift for the original giver, and so on. Breaking this obligation is commonly seen as a slight or even a rejection of the other person involved in the exchange.

Fortunately, another there seems to be another trend among gift-givers -- especially those who have become disgruntled with the commercialization of the holiday. They still want to hand out gifts, but to help other people at the same time. Increasingly, people are making donations to worthy causes such as food banks or children's organizations in the name of their usual gift recipients. This is a form of reciprocity where everyone wins.

Gouldner, a.W. (1960). The norm of reciprocity: A preliminary statement. American Sociological Review, 25, 161-178.

Sparrowe, R.T., & Liden, R.C. (1997). Process and structure in leader-member exchange. Academy of Management Review, 22, 522-552.