Theories of romantic relationships: Equity theory Flashcards
What is the difference between the SET theory and equity theory
- include a name
SET suggests that partners aim to maximise the rewards and minimise the costs of a relationship
Whereas Walster et al propose that equity is more important where both partner’s level of profit (rewards minus costs) should be roughly the same
Over benefitting and under benefitting -> dissatisfaction
Under benefitted partner is likely to be the least satisfied and their feelings may be evident in anger and resentment
Over benefitted partner may feel less dissatisfied but is still likely to feel discomfort and shame
Equity
It is not the size or amount of the rewards ands costs that matter, it is the ratio of the two to each other
Fairness of ratios
e.g if one partner is disabled they may not do certain chores but compensate in other areas, partners still feel a sense of fairness
Changed in perceived equity
The greater the perceived inequity, the greater the dissatisfaction - equity theory predicts a strong positive correlation between the two
Applies to over benefitted and under benefitted partner
At the start of a relationship it may feel perfectly natural to contribute more than you receive. But if the situation carries on as the relationship develops (one person continues to put more in and get less out), the dissatisfaction will set in
Dealing with inequity
Under benefitted partner is motivated to make the relationship more equitable if they believe the relationship is salvageable. The greater the inequality the harder it is to restore equity
BUT they may also have to revise their perceptions of what is fair and accept the new norm (untidy, abusive e.t.c) - cognitive change
What is one strength
Supportive research
Evaluation: Supportive research
P: There is evidence to support the equity theory, which makes it an effective way to explain adult romantic relationships.
E: As an example, Utne et al. (1984) used two self-report scales to measure equity in a study of 118 recently married couples. Before getting married, the husband and wife, who ranged in age from 16 to 45, had been dating for at least two years. Researchers discovered that couples who felt they were equally benefiting from their relationship were happier than those who felt they were either overly or underly benefiting.
E: The idea that equity, or being fair, is more crucial to maintaining a connection than mere equality—as put out by the Social Exchange Theory—makes this a strength.
E: This is a strength because it supports the notion that equity (being fair) is more important in maintaining a relationship than simply equality (as proposed by the Social Exchange Theory). Compared to the social exchange theory, the equity theory is more reliable and accurate in explaining relationships in everyday life.
L: As a result, the equity theory’s ability to explain adult romantic relationships has increased.
What are the two limitations
Individual differences
Contradictory research
Evaluation: Individual differences
P: One weakness of the equity theory as an explanation for adult romantic relationships is that it does not account for individual differences
E: Huseman et al. (1987), for instance, believe that certain individuals are less sensitive to equity than others. Some people, according to them, are kindhearted and willing to give more of themselves to a relationship than they receive in return. Some people are entitled and think they should beover benefitted, so they take it without feeling upset or guilty.
E:This is a flaw because, in contrast to the theory’s claims, Huseman’s research demonstrates that equity is not often a universal aspect of romantic relationships and is most definitely not a universal rule of social interaction. In romantic relationships, establishing equity is not a concern for all partners.
L: As a result, the theory’s validity as an explanation for adult romantic relationships is reduced.
Evaluation: Contradictory research
P: More conflicting evidence adds to the equity theory’s weaknesses as an explanation for romantic relationships in adulthood.
E: Berg and McQuinn (1986), for instance, discovered that in their long-term investigation of dating couples, equity did not rise.
E: This is a weakness since the evidence contradicts the equity theory’s expectations, which hold that fulfilling romantic relationships ought to progress towards greater equity over time. Moreover, the equity theory failed to differentiate between relationships that ended and those that continued, nor did it take into account other factors like self-disclosure that were noticeably more important.
L: Consequently, this raises more questions about the validity of the equity thesis as a justification for adult romantic relationships.
