Theories of Romantic Relationships

Question 1

When was Rusbult’s Investment Model of Commitment created?

Answer 1

2001.

Question 2

According to Rusbult et al’s (2011) commitment depends on what three factors?

Answer 2

Satisfaction level​.

Comparison with alternatives​.

Investment size​.

Question 3

Outline ‘satisfaction level’ as a factor affecting commitment.

Answer 3

Refers to the positive and negative effect experienced in a relationship.​

Satisfaction is influenced by the degree to which a partner meets the individual’s needs e.g. emotional needs and sexual needs.​

If a partner is unable to meet these needs then this will be perceived as a cost and will influence their level of satisfaction.​

Question 4

Outline ‘comparison with alternatives’ as a factor affecting commitment.

Answer 4

Refers to the perceived desirability of the best alternative to current relationships.​

‘Could my needs be met outside my current relationship?’​

If the needs could be better met outside of the relationship then the quality of alternatives are high.

However, if such needs are best met within the current relationship then commitment is stronger.​

Alternatives can also include the possibility of not having a romantic partner.

Question 5

Outline ‘investment size’ as a factor affecting commitment.

Answer 5

Rusbult realised that the CL and comparison levels of alternatives from SET are not enough to explain commitment.​

If they were, then many more relationships would end as soon as the costs outweighed the rewards or a more attractive partner presented itself.​

Acknowledges that earlier theories were being reductionist.

Investments give greater insight as to why people may stay in a ‘non-profitable’ relationship.

Question 6

What did Rusbult mean by ‘investments’?

Answer 6

The extent and importance of the resources associated with the relationship.

An investment can be understood as anything we would lose if the relationship was to end.​

Question 7

Rusbult’s idea of investments strengthens what?

Answer 7

The theories ecological validity.

Question 8

Rusbult argued that there are two major types of investments. What are they?

Answer 8

Intrinsic and extrinsic investments.

Question 9

Outline ‘intrinsic investments’ as one of the major types of relationship investments (proposed by Rusbult).

Answer 9

Any resources that we put directly into the relationship.

These resources are less easy to quantify, such as energy, emotion, self-disclosures.​

Can also include money and possessions.​

Question 10

Outline ‘extrinsic investments’ as one of the major types of relationship investments (proposed by Rusbult).

Answer 10

Resources that previously did not feature in the relationship, but are now closely associated with it.​

Tangible things include possessions bought together (car, house), mutual friends acquired since the relationship began, children, and shared memories.​

Question 11

Rusbult highlighted that there are also two variables linked with commitment. What were they?

Answer 11

Equity.

Social support.

Question 12

Outline ‘equity’ as a variable linked with commitment.

Answer 12

The degree of ‘fairness’ within a relationship.

Inequity (perceived unfairness) leads to distress and lack of satisfaction with a relationship and thus less commitment.​

Such distress can be relieved by ending the relationship.​

Question 13

Outline ‘social support’ as a variable linked with commitment.

Answer 13

The degree of care and assistance available from others, such as from family and friends.​

If such others approve of a relationship it produces a positive influence that increases commitment to the relationship.​

Question 14

Outline Rusbult and Martz’s research from 1995.

Answer 14

Interviewed women at a refuge.

They found that when abused women felt their investment in a relationship was significant (been together for a long time or had children) they were less likely to leave.

Question 15

Outline Lin and Rusbult’s research from 1995.

Answer 15

Challenges Rusbult’s model, as they found that although findings were inconsistent, females generally reported higher satisfaction levels, poorer scores for quality of alternatives, greater investments and stronger overall commitment.

This suggests gender differences may exist within the model, with females demonstrating greater dependence and stronger commitment than males.

This highlights how the model is deterministic, as it does not consider gender differences and individual differences.

Question 16

Outline Van Lange et al’s research from 1997.

Answer 16

Support all factors of the model in Taiwanese participants.

This was coupled with similar results found by Lin & Rusbult (1995) with Dutch participants.

Suggesting that the model has cross-cultural validity.

Question 17

Outline Rusbult et al’s research from 1998.

Answer 17

Provides support for all three factors of Rusbult’s model.

They gave the investment model scale questionnaire to student participants in relationships.

They found that commitment in relationships was:

Positively correlated with satisfaction level.
Negatively correlated with the quality of alternatives.
Positively correlated with investment size.

This suggests that Rusbult’s model is accurate.

However, it was only conducted on student relationships so external validity is weakened as it cannot be generalised to wider populations.

Conversely, the relationships were real - so this increases the internal validity of the study.