Relationships: Rustbelts Investment Model Flashcards
Outline Rustbelts Investment Model
- It seeks to explain why relationships persist and others do not. Its central idea is that relationships which persist are those with high levels of commitment.
What is commitment?
The intention to persist in a relationship. It reflects a sense of allegiance to ones partner. Rusbult identified three factors (satisfaction, quality of alternatives and investment) that determine a persons level of commitment to their partner.
What is Satisfaction?
Refers to the balance of positive and negative emotions experienced in the relationship.
A high level of satisfaction level is likely to increase commitment.
Satisfaction level increases to the extent that a relationship gratifies the individuals most important needs, including needs for companionship, security, intimacy, sexuality and belonging.
What is Comparison with alternatives?
- Refers to the extent to which an individuals needs might be better fulfilled outside the current relationship, either in an alternative relationship or by becoming single.
If the quality of alternatives is low, then the person will be more dependant on their partner and therefore will be more committed. The opposite applies if the quality of alternatives is seen as high.
What is Investment?
Refers to the size and importance of resources associated with a relationship and the extent to which such resources would decline in value if the relationship were to end.
Invested resources enhance commitment because the act of investment increases the costs of ending a relationship, serving as a powerful psychological incentive for remaining in the relationship.
Rusbult distinguishes two types of investment:
- Tangible Investment include things with an obvious value (eg money and possessions)
- Intangible Investment include things that are harder to put a specific value on such as time, energy, children and shared friends.
What is a relationship maintenance behaviour?
- High commitment levels encourage partners to engage in relationship maintenance behaviours that help the relationship persist through challenges.
- E.g Willing to sacrifice — putting the partners interests first.
What research is there in support of the investment model as a Henry of romantic relationships?
Le (2003) conducted a meta-analysis of 52 studies from 5 countries and found that satisfaction, quality of alternatives and investment size were all correlated with commitment, and that commitment was highly correlated
with stability in long term relationships. These correlations perfectly match the predictions of the investment model, suggesting the model provides a
valid account of the variables that contribute to the stability of romantic relationships. Moreover, this study’s
support for the investment model is strengthened by its use of meta analysis. Meta-analyses are powerful
techniques that combine the results of multiple studies. As a result, they have large representative samples, making
this study’s support for the investment model generalisable to the romantic relationships of people not included in
this study. In addition, the fact that this study’s meta-analysis drew on research from multiple countries provides
additional support for the investment model. If there is support for the investment model’s predictions from
different counties, this suggests the investment model may offer a genuinely universal explanation of romantic relationships, rather than providing a culturally biased explanation that presents as being universal which in fact it only explains how romantic relationships work in some cultural contexts. The fact that the evidence for the Investment Model is found across cultures may suggest that the human need for investment and commitment to relationships developed through the process of natural selection to help people survive and reproduce. For example, parents who are committed to their relationship and invest in it will have a higher chance of ensuring their children’s survival and therefore of passing on their genes. This means that the Investment Model supports the nature side of
the nature-nurture debate.
What is a limitation of the investment model as a theory of romantic relationships?
The methodology of the supporting research is limited. Many of the studies supporting the investment model have collected self-report data and established associations between the variables identified by Rusbult (e.g., an association between high levels of investment and commitment). This is a problem for the investment model as correlation does not equal causation. The association between investment and commitment might mean that investment increases commitment, but it might also be the case that greater levels of commitment cause partners to invest more in the relationship. This undermines the investment model as a theory of romantic relationships, as the supporting evidence is limited. Moreover, the data collected in these studies may be limited as it comes from self-reports. One issue here is that the self-reported data on sensitive topics like romantic relationships is highly vulnerable to social desirability bias. This means participants may provide inaccurate statements of their relationship behaviour in order to make themselves appear socially acceptable. If the data for these studies is invalid, then this undermines its utility in supporting the investment model as an explanation for romantic relationships. However, other researchers argue that, because satisfaction, investment and
commitment are subjective values and depend on people’s perception, using self-report techniques is the most
appropriate way to test the investment model.
What is a strength of the investment model as a theory of romantic relationships?
Its explanatory power is limited. For example, Rusbult and Martz (1995) found that committed victims of domestic abuse (those who were most
likely to return to their abusive
partners) reported making the greatest investment and having the fewest attractive alternatives. This helps to explain why those trapped in clearly unsatisfying relationships, like victims of abuse, would return to
their partners: although a relationship may be unsatisfying, where investment levels are high and the quality of
alternatives is seen as low, a person may still remain committed to their relationship. This therefore confirms the predictions of the investment model as a theory of romantic relationships
