Relationships L5 - 8 Flashcards
Social exchange theory and who was it proposed by:
- An economic theory assuming that romantic partners act of self-interest in exchanging rewards and costs
- Thibault and Kelley (1959)
How is a committed relationship maintained according social exchange theory?
When rewards exceed costs and potential alternatives are less attractive than current relationship
What economic assumption is social exchange theory based on?
Minimise losses and maximise gains
Give examples of rewards and costs in a relationship (3 examples):
Rewards:
- Companionship
- Sex
- Emotional support
Costs:
- Time
- Stress
- Energy
What did Blau (1964) say about costs in a relationship?
- Relationships can be ‘expensive’
- Relationships can incur the cost of ‘opportunity’
2 ways in which we profit in a romantic relationship:
1) Comparison level
2) Comparison level for alternative
Comparison level:
- Amount of reward you believe you deserve to get
- Based on previous relationship expectations, social norms and person’s self-esteem
- Relationship is worth pursuing if CL is high
Comparison level for alternative:
- Wider context of current relationships
- Whether alternatives would gain the individual more profit than the current relationship
4 stages by Thibault and Kelley:
1) Sampling stage –> Explore rewards and costs of social exchange by observing others/experimenting ourselves
2) Bargaining stage –> Marks beginning of relationship, when partners exchange rewards and costs, negotiating and identifying what is most profitable
3) Commitment stage –> Sources of rewards and costs become more predictable with more stability in relationship
4) Institutionalisation stage –> Partners settle down because rewards and costs are firmly established
Strengths and weaknesses of Social Exchange Theory: (+2,-5)
+ Research support –> Gottman (1992)
+ Practical application to couples having relationship issues
- People only monitor rewards and costs once the relationship has become dissatisfying –> Argyle and Duck
- More external factors than just rewards and costs –> Blau (1964)
- Difficult to define a reward and cost –> Littlejohn (1989)
- Not applicable to collectivist cultures –> Moghaddam (1998)
- Most research is conducted on young people in short-term relationships
Gottman (1992):
- Successful marriages –> Ratio of positive to negative exchanges are 5:1
- Unsuccessful marriages –> Ratio is 1:1
Jacobson (2000):
Integrated couples therapy helps partners decrease number of negative exchanges and increase positive exchanges
Argyle and Duck:
- Argyle disagrees that people monitor their relationships in terms of rewards and costs
- Duck agrees and says we only look at comparison levels if we are dissatisfied
Blau (1964):
- Human beings are selfish to think of relationship maintenance in terms of rewards and costs
- Rooted in behavioural approach when cognitive approach would probably be better suited (some relationships continue despite having disproportionately more costs
Equity theory:
Economic theory stating that one partners’ benefits minus their costs should equal the other partner’s benefits minus their costs
What is different between social exchange theory and equity theory?
Social exchange theory focuses on rewards and costs whereas equity theory looks more at fairness
How do over-benefitters and under-benefitters feel in a relationship according to equity theory?
- Over-benefitters: Guilt and shame
- Under-benfitters: Anger and resentment
In what two ways does equity change over time?
- Perception
- How to deal with inequity
4 principles of equity according to who?
According to Walster et al (1978):
1) Profit –> maximising rewards, minimising costs
2) Distribution –> negotiation of rewards and costs to ensure fairness
3) Dissatisfaction –> unfairness leads to stress
4) Realignment –> disadvantaged person aims to restore equity
Give studies supporting equity theory:
- Utne et al (1984)
- Stafford and Canary (2006)
- Brosnan and de Waal (2003)
Utne et al (1984):
- 118 Pps between 16 and 45, who have been together for 2 or more years
- Self-report scales to measure equity and satisfaction
- Those who rated their relationships more equitable were also more satisfied
Stafford and Canary (2006):
- 200 married couples completed questionnaires equity and satisfaction
- Questions about ways they maintained relationships
- Those who saw their relationship as fair were most satisfied, followed by over-benefitters, under-benefitters were least satisfied
Brosnan et de Waal (2003):
- Capuchin monkeys
- Became very angry when denied reward (grapes) for playing a game that fellow monkeys actually received
Strengths and weaknesses of equity theory: (+1, -5)
+ Research support –> Utne et al (1984), Stafford and Canary (2006), Brosnan and de Waal (2003)
- Conflicting research evidence –> Berg and McQuinn (1986)
- Cause and effect issues –> Van Yperen and Buunk (1990), Hussman et al (1987)
- Gender differences –> Sprecher (1992), DeMaris et al (1998)
- Nomothetic –> Mills and Clarke (1982)
- Cultural differences –> Aumer-Ryan et al (2006)
How did Berg and McQuinn (1986) conflict the research found?
- Longitudinal study on 38 dating couples
- No increase in equity over time (contrary to theory)
- Equity is either present or not in the beginning and often predicts a couple’s break-up but doesn’t increase
How does Van Yperen and Buunk (1990) show cause and effect cannot be established?
- In married couples, dissatisfaction in inequitable relationships increased over time, rather than decreasing
- Distinctive individual differences eg benevolents (give more in relationship) and entitleds (expect more in relationship)
How does Sprecher (1992) show there are gender differences in perception of equity?
Women tend to feel more disturbed when under-benefitting and guilty when over-benefitting
How does DeMaris et al (1998) show there are gender differences in perception of equity?
Women are more focused on relationships and so are more sensitive to injustice
How do Mills and Clarke (1982) show equity theory cannot be nomothetic (universal)?
- Not possible to assess equity in terms of loving relationships as a lot of input is emotional and unquantifiable
- Idiographic approach would be better
How does Aumer-Ryan et al (2006) show cultural differences in equity theory?
- Equity only applies to individualistic cultures
- Men and women in collectivist cultures claimed to be more satisfied when over-benefitting, rather than fairness
What 3 factors does Rusbult’s investment model include and what does it show?
1) Satisfaction
2) Alternatives
3) Investments
- It shows commitment level into relationship
What is satisfaction?
The positive/negative emotional experiences that a person in a relationship feels
What is satisfaction influenced by and what can it be compared against?
- Satisfaction influenced by the extent to which their partner fulfils their needs
- Compared against past relationships
How does a comparison of alternatives show commitment level?
If quality of alternatives are low or not available, commitment level is greater
How does investment size contribute to commitment levels?
- Measure of the importance and extent of resources attached to the relationship
- The number of things that could be lost if relationship ended
What are the 2 types of investment and what are they?
- Intrinsic –> Direct investment like money/energy
- Extrinsic –> Investment not present at start of relationship but has developed over time
What 3 levels does satisfaction, comparison of alternatives and investment size need to be at for high commitment?
- High satisfaction
- Low comparison of alternative
- High investment size
Who conducted research on the investment model?
Le and Agnew (2003)
Le and Agnew (2003):
- Meta-analysis of 52 studies between 1970 and 1990
- 11,000 participants from 5 countries: UK, USA, Taiwan, Netherlands
- Explored different factors of investment model
- Satisfaction and commitment were significantly correlated (+0.68)
- Quality of alternatives had lowest correlation (-0.48)
- Investment size also correlated (+0.6)
- Those with high commitment were likely to stay in relationship, those will low ones were not
Strengths and weaknesses of Rusbult’s investment model: (+3, -2)
+ Research support –> Le and Agnew (2003), Van Lange (1997)
+ Helps to explain infidelity, staying in abusive relationships
+ Explains commitment in various relationships –> Investment Scale Model questionnaire
- Difficult to measure each of the factors
- Gender differences –> Lin (1995)
Van Lange (1997):
- Students from Taiwan and from Netherlands
- High commitment levels in a relationship were related to high satisfaction, low quality of alternatives and high investment size
Who administered the Investment Model Scale questionnaire and what did it show?
- Rusbult administered it on people in a homosexual relationship
- All factors of the model were important when looking at commitment
Lin (1995):
Females tend to report higher satisfaction, poorer quality of alternatives, greater investment and stronger commitment
What is relationship breakdown?
One or both people in the relationship feel that it is not working and therefore, wish for the relationship to end
Who proposed a phase model for the breakdown of relationships?
Duck (1982)
What are the 4 phases of relationship breakdown?
1) Intrapsychic phase
2) Dyadic phase
3) Social phase
4) Grave dressing phase
Intrapsychic phase: (3)
- Dissatisfied person privately thinking about faults in relationship
- Don’t say anything to partner
- Feel better off leaving
Dyadic phase: (2)
- Private confrontation between partners
- Could be reconciliation eg marriage therapy
Social phase: (3)
- Breakup is made public
- Advice and support given from others
- Can involve scape-goating and criticising former partners
Grave dressing phase: (2)
- Need to mourn and justify our actions
- Different versions of relationship are given to different people
Strengths and weaknesses of relationship breakdown: (+3,-4)
+ Improvement made to model to avoid lack of temporal validity –> resurrection phase
+ Model of breakdown is productive
+ Research support from Social Exchange Theory –> Kelley
- Conflicting research evidence –> Akert (1998)
- Gender differences –> Kassin (1996)
- Ethical issues
- Reductionist –> a relationship is more than just 4 stages
Who created resurrection phase, in what year and what was it?
- Duck and Rollie (2006)
- Created a 5th phase called resurrection phase
- Person engages in personal growth
What study shows that the model of breakdown is productive?
- Frazier (2003)
- 92 undergrads who had just broken up w/ partner
- Found they experienced emotional distress but there was evidence of personal growth (resurrection)
What did Kelley say about social exchange theory and how does it link to the model of relationship breakdown?
- Supports the model
- If a relationship has high costs and minimal rewards, it is not worth continuing and would probs break down
What conflicting research evidence did Akert (1998) find?
- Role people had in deciding relationship should break down was most important predictor of breakdown experience
- Those who didn’t initiate were most miserable and lonely
- Those who initiated were least stressed and upset but felt guilty
How does Kassin (1996) show gender differences?
- Females emphasise unhappiness, lack of emotional support and incompatibility as reasons for relationship breakdown
- Males state lack of sex/fun
- Females often want to stay friends with ex but males want a clean break
What 3 ethical issues are there in the relationship breakdown model?
- Social sensitivity eg psychological harm
- Invasion of privacy
- Anonymity
