R - Theories of romantic relationships Flashcards
What does the Social Exchange Theory (SET) propose?
- It proposes that romantic partners act in self-interest to make a ‘profit’ by maximizing rewards (like love and compassion) and minimizing costs (like time and effort) in a relationship
Comparison Level in SET
The amount of reward you believe you deserve to get from a relationship is influenced by previous experiences and social norms
Comparison level for alternatives in SET
People stay in a relationship if they believe it is more rewarding than alternatives (self-esteem has influence)
Negative evaluation of Social Exchange Theory
- Rewards and costs in a relationship is subjective and will differ from person to person, making it difficult to measure which in turn limits the reliability of the theory
- Assumes that considering alternatives triggers satisfaction but people in loving relationships won’t look elsewhere, due to already being satisfied
- Gender differences: One study found that men were happy in a ‘profit’ whiles women didn’t enjoy over benefitting and preferred equity
What does the equity theory propose?
- Proposes that both partners profit (rewards minus costs) in a relationship should roughly be the same
- Lack of equity leads to dissatisfaction
Negative evaluation of the equity theory
- It’s hard to practically measure equality as it is do with perception of action, what one individual considers a reward another may not
- Does not account for cultural difference research has found that couples in collectivist cultures were most satisfied when they over benefitted whiles those in individualistic cultures were most satisfied when their relationship was equitable.
- However, it could be argued that globalisation and social media has led to a more integrated opinion on a satisfactory relationship
- Individual differences
Positive evaluation of equity theory
- It can be implemented in relationship counselling because it can be used to find unfairness in the relationship that can be worked on
- Supporting research has found partners who perceived their relationships as fair and balanced experienced most satisfaction
General negative evaluation of theories of romantic relationships
- The UK in the 1960s, had divorce rates of 4% whereas in the 1980s the divorce rates increased to 50%. This suggests that peoples ideas of a satisfactory relationship can change over time therefore, you cannot make generalisations as research can quickly become outdated
- All economic theories which miss out the emotional element of a relationship
What does Rusbult’s investment model propose?
- There are three factors influencing commitment: satisfaction, comparison (SET) and investment size
- She proposed that the investment size influences the commitment level
- The greater the investment, the more prone the romantic partner is to use relationship maintenance mechanisms to keep the relationship ‘alive’; if the relationship ends, the investment will be lost (this could include money, mutual friends, time and energy)
What are some relationship maintenance mechanisms?
- Positive illusion
- Willingness to sacrifice
- Forgiveness
What are the three factors determining commitment level according to the investment model?
- Satisfaction levels
- Comparison to alternatives
- Investment size
Positive evaluation of Rusbult’s investment model
- High ecological validity: it can be used to explain why people stay in abusive relationships; due to size of investment and lack of alternatives (self-esteem)
Negative evaluation of Rusbult’s investment model
- Oversimplifies investment, the original model did not include future plans as a factor in investment. That individuals are committed to each other because they want to plans for the future work out
What does Duck’s phase model propose?
The breakdown of a relationship is not a one-off event but a distinct four phase process
What are the four stages of Duck’s phase model?
- Intra-psychic phase
- Dyadic phase
- Social phase
- Grave-dressing phase
What is stage 1 of Duck’s phase model?
- The intra-psychic phase
- Threshold: ‘I can’t stand this anymore’
- Private; dissatisfied partner weighs up the pros and cons of the relationship
What is stage 2 of Duck’s phase model?
- Dyadic phase
- Threshold: ‘I would be justified to end it’
- A series of confrontations where the partners discuss the state of the relationship
What is stage 3 of Duck’s phase model?
- Social phase
- Threshold: ‘I mean it’
- The break up is made public and mutual friends are expected to pick a side
What is stage 4 of Duck’s phase model?
- Grave-dressing phase
-The focus is now on the aftermath and how to ‘spin’ their version of the break-up for public consumption
Negative evaluation of the Duck’s phase model
- Most of the research relating to Duck’s model is retrospective; participants give their experience of the breakdown processes after the relationship has ended, this means that recall is unlikely to be accurate, it’s understandable that the early stages of a break up seem to be distorted
- Moreover, it would have been unethical to study relationship break-ups at an early point because their involvement could influence the direction of the relationship e.g. a relationship that could have been saved won’t be
- Cultural bias: The model and most of the research supporting it were based on the experience in the US, an individualistic culture and hence, cannot be generalisable to collectivist cultures
Positive evaluation of Duck’s phase model
- Has face validity as it reflects the experiences of many people who have gone through a break-up
- The model could be applied to couples counselling as it could identify key triggers for conflict and suggests strategies that could help reverse it e.g. those in the intra-psychic phase could be encourages to broaden the positive impacts of their partner and those in the dyadic phase could be encouraged to improve on communication
