Theories of romantic relationships

Question 1

Social exchange theory

Answer 1

Thibaut and Kelly, 1959

Individuals perceive a relationship to be satisfactory based on the exchange of rewards gained and costs incurred by being in that relationship

Commitment is dependent on how profitable it is to the individual

Measured on two levels: CL, CL Alt

Question 2

Comparison level

Answer 2

Level we judge a relationship against

Base on our perceptions of other relationships we have had or seen

If a potential new relationship compares highly to our individual comparison level then we are likely to want to form that relationship

Subjective measure & can be affected by factors e..g. Self esteem, explaining why you may stay in an unhealthy relationship

Question 3

Comparison level for alternatives

Answer 3

Involves a similar cost benefit analysis, but we compare the costs vs benefits in our current relationship with those of potential relationships

If the potential rewards of being in a new relationship outweigh the costs of current, then we are likely to end current relationship

Question 4

4 stages of social exchange

Answer 4

Sampling

Bargaining

Commitment

Institutionalisation

Question 5

Sampling

Answer 5

We experiment with the costs and benefits we receive in different relationships in our lives

Question 6

Bargaining

Answer 6

At the start of a relationship we begin to negotiate various costs and benefits to maximise our profit

Question 7

Commitment

Answer 7

A relationship is maintained as we begin to predict what the exchange of our costs vs benefits will be for us

Question 8

Institutionalisation

Answer 8

A relationship becomes lasting once our costs vs benefits are firmly established

Question 9

Equity theory

Answer 9

Walster 1978

Assumes that both partners will have a similar level of costs vs benefits (rather than focusing on being in profit)

This balance may not be equal but it should be perceived as equitable

4 principles

Question 10

Equity theory principles

Answer 10

Profit

Distribution

Dissatisfaction

Realignment

Question 11

Profit

Answer 11

At the start of a relationship, we may seek to profit by maximising benefits and minimising costs before establishing equitable distribution

Question 12

Distribution

Answer 12

The distribution (trade-off) of costs and benefits is negotiated to ensure equity

Question 13

Dissatisfaction

Answer 13

An inequitable (unfair) relationship causes dissatisfaction

The partner who feels they are experiencing inequity may seek to realign the relationship

Question 14

Realignment

Answer 14

Realignment may occur if the partner experiencing dissatisfaction works hard to re establish equity through a change in their behaviour or their cognitions

Quit relationship or re-establish equity

Question 15

Strength of SET

Answer 15

Convincing research from

Susan Sprecher (2001) who measured satisfaction in 101 couples at university in the US

Found that when committed to the relationship, there was a higher level of reward in the comparison level compared to the comparison level for alternatives, opposite when deciding to breakup

Question 16

Limit 1 SET

Answer 16

Treats all relationships the same

This is because it assumes relationships are based on the principles of exchange and reduces the success of a relationship down to its costs vs benefits

This may not apply to relationships which are not maintained in this way. Clarke and Mills (2011) argued SET ignores the ‘communal couple’, who are less concerned with the score keeping as it may be seen as unattractive and assume cost vs benefits balance our overall

Suggests SET may not provide a valid explanation of all relationships

Question 17

Limit 2 SET

Answer 17

Hard to operationalise

This is because factors such as costs and benefits are subjectively perceived by those in the relationship so it is hard to measure the individual’s CL and CLT Alt before they become dissatisfied in the relationship

Argyle (1987) argues SET ignores the fact that relationships are experienced as being more than the sum of benefits minus costs, and so it ignores the complexity of loving, long-term relationships

In reality we only notice how unfair a relationship is once we become dissatisfied

This suggests that, as SET is difficult to measure, it is hard to support it with valid research findings and may only apply to the part of the relationship where one of the couple becomes unhappy

Question 18

SET limit 3

Answer 18

Some may argue SET is beta biased

Which is when a theory unfairly minimises the differences between men and women

Prins (1993) found that women place more importance on exchange than men in the maintenance in their relationship, and those who felt under-benefitted were more likely to consider an affair

This suggests SET may not fully explain relationships is everyone

Question 19

SET strength

Answer 19

A strength is that it has practical applications

Which is when the principles of a theory can be applied to real life

SET has been used to develop integrated behavioural couples therapy (IBCT) which is based on the principles of SET by identifying and encouraging positive exchanges between couples

Christensen (2004) found that 2/3s of couples who used ICBT report a significant improvement in their relationship

This suggests that the principles of SET are useful and valid

Question 20

Equity strength

Answer 20

Significant evidence for the role of equity in the maintenance of romantic relationships

From Stafford and canary

Who performed a survey of over 200 married couples which measured the strategies used to maintain their relationship

Couples were asked how equitable their relationship was by how they shared tasks, re-assured each other and showed positivity

………

Question 21

Limit equity 1

Answer 21

Some argue not all individuals are concerned about equity in the same way

This is because some people are more sensitive to equity in relationships than others

E.g. Huseman (1987) suggests 3 different types of partners. Benevolents who are prepared to contribute more than they get out of a relationship .
Entitled who believe they are entitled to be over-benefited.
Equity sensitives who experience tension when faced with inequity

Therefore, equity theory may not consider individual differences within relationships

Question 22

Limit 2 equity

Answer 22

Not all relationships become equitable over time or can equity predict which relationships will last

This is because some relationships appear to be based on other factors

E.g. Berg and McQuinn (1986) found that equity did not increase in couples within their longitudinal study and was not correlated with whether a relationship would last

Therefore, equity theory alone may not be able to explain the maintenance of relationships