Theories of romantic relationships Flashcards
The Social Exchange Theory
Reward vs cost which leads to a profit level
Rewards- Gifts, quality time, happiness and wellbeing
Costs- Time, money and sacrifices
Thibult + Kelley (1959)
Predicted behaviour in relationships reflects the economic assumptions of exchange
Want to maximise profits whilst also minimising losses
One person may consider a reward less significant to another level
Blau (1964)
Relationships can be expensive
Opportunity cost- Investment of time and energy where resources aren’t being used elsewhere EG: Going out with your partner instead of your friends
Comparison level (CL)
The amount an individual believes they should get
Forms from previous relationships (EXPECTATIONS)
Involves being selfish EG: What am I getting?
Those with low self esteem= low CL= satisfied with gaining small profits or losses
High self esteem= feel they deserve more
Comparison levels for alternatives (CLat)
Looking at alternatives (other relationships they could be in)
Is there a greater reward?
Only stay in current relationship if its more rewarding
=Explains cheating
Duck (1994)
If people are current in their relationship they may notice alternatives = if the costs of current relationships outweigh the rewards, alternatives become more appealing
STAGES OF ROMANTIC DEVELOPMENT
- Sampling
- Bargaining
- Commitment
- Institutionalisation
- Sampling
Costs and rewards of a relationship are investigated with another
- Bargaining
Negotiating between two parties where rewards and costs are agreed
- Commitment
The exchange of rewards are stabilised, focus on the relationship
Hatfield (1979)
Questioned newlyweds about their contentment in their relationships
HAPPIEST COUPLES= Marriage was equal
Limitations of the social exchange theory
Doesn’t explain how perceptions of rewards and costs may change over time
Makes inappropriate assumptions about relationships
No couples keep a tally of rewards and costs
Artificial research
Correlational; doesn’t establish cause and effect
MILLER: Dissatisfaction comes first
ARGYLE: Individuals do not evaluate alternatives of measure rewards and costs
The Investment Model
(RUSBULT 1983)
People’s commitment to a relationship depended on their satisfaction
But also on how much they invested in the relationship that would be lost by ending it
Rusbult (1983)
Ps read hypothetical relationships varying in:
1. Satisfaction level
2. Alternatives
3. Investment
+ ps were asked how satisfied they thought each individual was in that relationship
FINDINGS:
Commitment is key long term
Shows why abusive relationships last longer due to commitment
High satisfaction = high commitment
Low alternatives = high commitment
High investments = high commitment
Satisfaction
Rewards and needs met
Based on CL= rewards and costs are weighed to measure how profitable the relationship is
What is meant by investment?
The resources associated with a romantic relationship which the partner would lose if the relationship ended
There are two types of investment
What are the two types of investment?
- Intrinsic investment
- Extrinsic investment
- Intrinsic investment
Resources put directly into the relationship
EG: Money, personal info etc…
- Extrinsic investment
Possessions received together whilst in the relationship
EG: Shared pet, children (etc…)
Rusbult (2011)
Commitment is the main psychological factor when maintaining a relationship
Explains why dissatisfied people stay in relationships because they don’t want to waste the investment they put in to sustain and repair their relationship
Lee + Agnew (2003)
Meta-analysis FROM 1970-1999
11,000 ps from 5 countries
Measured levels of satisfaction, CLat, and investment (Predicted levels of commitment)
Those with high levels of commitment = most successful (True for m+f, homosexual and heterosexual relationships)
Equity Theory
WALSTER (1979)
‘Fairness’ and ‘equity’ in relationships
Doesn’t matter about the quantity but the quality of rewards
Quality of rewards is perceived differently
Have to find a compromise
Clark + Mills (2011)
Need to distinguish between different types of relationships
EG: Friendship, work friendship, acquaintances
What is meant by ‘inequity’?
Costs became the norm as the couple are more used to receiving costs rather than rewards
The more unfair= harder it is to store equity
Utne (1984)
Survey of 118 recently married couples
Equity was measured using 2 self-report scales
ps between 16-45
Those who believed their relationship was equitable were more satisfied than those under or over benefited
Dainton +Goss (2003)
When one individual feels the relationship is inequitable, more engagement in negative behaviours EG: Cheating, avoidance
Berg + McQuinn (1986)
Discovered high levels of self-disclosure and perceived equity in the beginning of relationships were a strong predictor that a couple would be more long-term
Reasons for relationship breakdown
BUCK (1992)
4 stages and another added in 2006
Breaking up isn’t a one-off event but a process over 4 stages
Each stage is a threshold indicator
BUCK’S 5 STAGES
- Intra psychic phase
- Dyadic phase
- Social stage
- Grave-dressing stage
- Resurrection stage
Stage 1: Intra psychic phase
“I can’t take this anymore”
Cognitive processing occurs in an individual
Focus on reasons for dissatisfaction
PRIVATELY consult thoughts
Plan for future undecided
Stage 2: Dyadic phase
“Would it make sense to stay together or leave”
Come to a conclusion: Break up or repair relationship
Dissatisfaction is brought out
Stage 3: Social stage
Fully deciding what to do
Wider processing surrounding the couple’s social network
Break up is public: See allies
Mutual friends pick sides
Some provide reassurance and some are judgemental and blame the other party
Some reveal secrets to end the relationship
Tends to be the point of return
Stage 4: Grave-dressing stage
“Its time to move on”
Attributional bias; perception of the break up depends on which party you hear the break up from
Each partner tries to retain social credit
Positives are all negative
Stage 5: Resurrection stage
Added by Rollie and Duck (2006)
Stage 5: Resurrection stage
Added by Rollie and Duck (2006)
“Things will be different next time”
Learn from the experience and use it for future relationships
Partner acknowledges what’s wrong
Moving on and accepting (Gaining closure)
