equity theory Flashcards
introduction
• An extension of social exchange theory. Suggests that people are content in their relationship if the benefits are roughly equal to the costs. Relationships that lack equity are more likely to be associated with dissatisfaction.
• Unlike Social Exchange Theory that argues how people try to maximise rewards and minimise costs in relationships, Equity
Theory suggests that partners are concerned about fairness in relationships. Fairness is achieved when people feel they get approximately what they deserve from relationships.
equity theory
Equity theory proposes the winning formula of fairness in relationships: one partner’s benefits minus their costs, should equal another partner’s benefits minus their costs.
• If one partner perceives a relationship as unfair, they are going to be dissatisfied with it regardless of whether they are over-benefitting or under-benefitting.
• According to the Equity Theory, a person who gets more benefits out of relationships than they put in will feel guilt and shame, and those who think they put a lot in but get very little back will be angry and resentful.
• The longer this feeling of unfairness (lack of equity) goes on, the more likely a couple is to break up.
• Equity doesn’t mean equality, though. It is not about the number of rewards and costs, but rather about the balance between them; if a person puts a lot into a relationship and receives a lot, it will feel fair to them.
Moreover, perception of equity changes over time. For example, it is perfectly normal for many people to put in more than they receive at the beginning of a relationship, but if it carries on like that for too long, it will lead to dissatisfaction.
• Finally, a partner’s way of dealing with inequity also changes with time. What seemed unfair in the beginning may become a norm as relationships progress, or the partner who gives more may start working even harder on the relationship until the balance is restored.
strength-research support
Supporting evidence includes studies of real-life relationships that confirm equity theory as a more valid explanation that SET.
Mart Utne et al. (1984) carried out a survey of 118 recently married couples, measuring equity with two self-report scales.
These husbands and wives were ages between 16-45 years and has been together for more than 2 years before marrying. The researchers found that couples who considered their relationship equitable were more satisfied than those who saw themselves and over or under benefitting.
Such research confirms the central prediction of equity theory, increasing its validity as an explanation of romantic relationships.
limitation-contradictory research
There is also research that contradicts Equity Theory.
For example, Berg and McQuinn (1986), conducted a longitudinal study on 38 dating couples.
They didn’t find any increase in equity over time, but discovered that a high level of self-disclosure and perceived equity in the beginning of the relationships was a strong predictor that a couple would stay in their relationship, and low equity in the beginning was a reliable predictor of a break-up. In other words, it seems that perceived fairness is either present or not in relationships from the start, and does not develop with time, contrary to the prediction of Equity Theory.
These findings oppose the central claim of the theory, and contradict the idea that equity increases over time, after the initiation of a romantic relationship. It also suggests that other factors e.g. Self-Disclosure may play a more important role in relationships.
limitation-issues and debates
A problem with many theory’s about romantic relationships is that they use a nomothetic approach.
Equity Theory, like other theories within the relationships topic, proposes a universal theory of romantic relationships that suggests that people are content in their relationship if the benefits equal the costs.
However, Mills & Clarke (1982) argue that it is not possible to assess equity in terms of loving relationships, as a lot of the input is emotional and unquantifiable.
Consequently, it may be better to study romantic relationships using an idiographic approach which focuses on the qualitative experiences of individuals, rather than employing a nomothetic approach to generate universal laws for human relationships.
