investment model Flashcards
Researcher for investment model
Rusbult
Investment model definition
An explanation of relationship stability that emphasises the importance of three factors in determining relationship commitment, which in turn predicts relationship stability
4/5 elements of inv model
Satisafction level
Quality of alternatives
Investment size
=
Commitment level
=
(stay or go)
Satisfaction level
A measure of the degree to which the current partner gratifies a person’s important needs
eg: a partner may feel satisfied to the degree that the other partner gratifies their domestic and sexual needs
Quality of alternatives
An individuals assessment of whether their needs might be better fulfilled by somebody other than their current partner
If attractive alternatives are superior to current rel, might be motivated towards the alt and away from current rel
If alternatives arent present, may persist w rel bc no better options or in some rel, no rel is more attractive than current one
Investment size
A measure of all the resources attached to the relationship which would be lost if the relationship were to end
eg: kids, friends, financial
Commitment level
The likelihood that an individual will persist with their current relationship.
High commitment level
High satisfaction level + high investment size + low quality of alternatives
Low commitment level
Low satsifaction level + low investment size + high quality of alternatives
Research into investment model
Le and Agnew
Proc: A meta-analysis of 52 studies comprising a total of 11,000 participants from 5 countries
Findings: Across all studies, satisfaction level , quality of alts and inv size were highly correlated w commitment level
Correlation w satisfaction level and commitment signif stronger than either quality of alt and inv size
AO3:
str: RWA abuse
lim/str: self-report techniques
lim: future
str: wide application
str: RWA abuse
The Investment Model provides a plausible explanation for why people stay in abusive relationships.
According to the model, if a partner feels that the investment they made into relationships will be lost if they leave, they are more likely to stay in a relationship even when the costs are high (such as physical or emotional abuse) and rewards are few.
Research into abusive relationships supports this idea. For example, Rusbult and Martz, in their study of ‘battered’ women, found that women were more likely to return to an abusive partner if they felt they had invested in the relationship and they didn’t have any appealing alternatives.
This shows that the Investment Model can be applied to a wide range or relationships experiences that the SET and Equity Theory fail to explain, thus increasing the Investment Model’s application to everyday relationships.
lim/str: self-report techniques
Self-report techniques
Some psychologists point out that most evidence for the Investment Model comes from interviews and questionnaires, which are known to be subjective and unreliable.
However, other researchers argue that, because satisfaction, investment and commitment are subjective values and depend on people’s perception, using self-report techniques is an appropriate way to test the Investment Model.
Therefore, data obtained through self-report techniques may provide a more realistic picture of reasons for relationship satisfaction and how it is related to investment and commitment, therefore making Investment Model more valid.
lim: future
Even though the importance of investment was clearly demonstrated by research, some psychologists think that Rusbult’s idea of relationship investment is oversimplified.
For example, Goodfriend and Agnew argue that it is not just things we bring to the relationships that could count as investment, but also a couple’s plans for their future. In their view, partners will be committed to staying in the relationships because they want to see these plans realised.
This shows that investment in romantic relationships is a complex phenomenon, consisting of many different factors, which makes the Investment Model reductionist.
str: wide application
Culture bias doesn’t seem to be an issue for the Investment Model.
Le and Agnew’s meta-analysis of 52 studies found support for the Investment Model across individualist and collectivist cultures, such as in the USA (individualist culture) and in Taiwan (collectivist culture).
Furthermore, the Investment Model, as an explanation of relationship maintenance, is also shown to be valid for different sub-groups, such as friendships; homosexual relationships; and cohabiting couples, etc.
This suggests the universality of the Investment Model, making it applicable to wide range of relationships.
