@Michael_B, this would be fine if the definition was also in a cloze. But, as the edit stands only the name of the theory is in a cloze and the original function of the card, soliciting a description of the underlying theory itself, is now lost.
I would vote either to keep it, but add a cloze to the explanation. Or revert as-was, but thems my thoughts.
I want to be careful with wording of the term, even between “social exchange theory” and just “exchange theory”; looking at 300 pg doc, it’s referenced as “exchange theory” there but, online, it is referenced as either. Great catch on the definition vs term being in the cloze. Between the suggested version and the original, the only real difference I see is that the suggested version specifies the theory being within microsociology. I think it’d be a lot more convenient to memorize which theories are microsociology vs macrosociology in its own card - that’d be just ideal for consolidation purposes. Browsing through the deck, we don’t have that.
That’s a very good point. I recall that coming up, and I had to make some cards for myself to distinguish macro/micro and which are both. That’s a good catch
Sorry, I was tired and feeling a little spiteful. Let someone else take the burden of choosing the cloze.