Theories of romantic relationships: Rusbult's model Flashcards
Outline what Rusbult’s model is
Further developed SET
A satisfying relationship is one where the partners are getting more out of the relationship than they expect, given social norms and previous experiences
Commitment results from 3 factors
Satisfaction - the extent to which partners feel the rewards of the romantic relationship exceed the costs
Comparison of alternatives - a judgement about whether a relationship with a different partner would increase rewards and reduce costs
Investment - the resources associated with a romantic relationship which would be lost if the relationship ended
Commitment
A romantic partner’s intention or desire to continue a relationship, reflecting a belief that the relationship has a viable long term future
There are two types of investment…
- explain each
Intrinsic - any resources put directly into the relationship (e.g money, energy and self disclosures)
Extrinsic - investments that previously did not feature in the relationship (i.e were external to it) which are now closely associated with it (e.g a jointly purchased house, children and shared memories)
Commitment is determined by satisfaction and alternatives and investment
High levels of satisfaction (more rewards with few costs) + alternatives are less attractive + the sizes of investment are increasing = partners will be committed in the relationship
Relationship maintenance mechanisms
- including cognitive
Committed partners use maintenance behaviours to keep the relationship going e.g
- Promoting the relationship (accommodation, making room for their quirks and issues)
- Putting their partner’s interests first (willingness to sacrifice)
- Forgiving them for any serious transgressions
Cognitive maintenance
- Positive illusions (seeing them in ‘brighter colours’)
- Ridiculing alternatives (picking at alternatives/opportunities/other people’s relationships)
What are the two strengths
Research support from a meta analysis
Can explain why people stay in abusive relationships
Evaluation: Research support from a meta analysis
The Investment Model’s strength lies in the multiple studies that back it up.
Le and Agnew (2003) discovered, for example, that significant factors influencing commitment were investment, comparison with alternatives, and satisfaction.
This strengthens the model’s credibility by confirming its claims on the factors that lead to commitment and that commitment is the most promising aspect of successful relationships that last.
Evaluation: Can explain why people stay in abusive relationships
The Investment Model offers a viable justification for why individuals stay in abusive relationships. The model states that partners are more inclined to stay in a relationship even when there are significant costs (such mental or physical abuse) and little gains if they believe that the investment they made in the relationship will be lost if they leave.
Studies on abusive partnerships validate this theory. In their research of “battered” women, for instance, Rusbult and Martz discovered that women were more likely to go back to an abusive partner if they felt they had invested in the relationship and had no compelling alternatives.
What are the limitations
Oversimplifies investment
Correlations
Evaluation: Oversimplifies investment
The model oversimplifies investments. Goodfriend and Agnew (2008) argue that there is more to investment than just the resources you have already put into a relationship. Early in the relationship partners make very few actual investments but they do invest in future plans. It is future plans that motivate partners to commit so that the plans can become reality.
This means that the original model is a limited explanation as it fails to consider the true complexity of investment.
Evaluation: Correlations
The use of correlations has become common in research. There are strong established correlations between the model’s component parts.
It does not, however, follow that one variable causes the other, regardless of how strong the association. Because of this, we are unable to determine what factors, if any, could lead to commitment.
