theories of romantic relationships: rusbult's investment model

Question 1

who proposed the investment model

Answer 1

rusbult et al. (2011) = commitment depends on 3 factors

Question 2

what was rusbult’s investment model developed from

Answer 2

social exchange theory

Question 3

3 factors in rusbult’s investment model

Answer 3

1. satisfaction
2. comparison for alternatives
3. investment

Question 4

describe factor 1: satisfaction

Answer 4

• based on comparison level concept
• judged by comparing rewards/costs
• profitable = many rewards (eg. support, sex) & few costs (eg. conflicts, anxiety)
• satisfied if getting more out of relationship than expected (based on previous experience/social norms)

Question 5

describe factor 2: comparison for alternatives

Answer 5

whether alternatives are most attractive & more rewards/fewer costs

Question 6

describe factor 3: investment

Answer 6

• rusbult realised CL & CLalt not sufficient to explain committment (from SET)
• anything lost if relationship ended
• 2 major investments:
  1. intrinsic investments: resources put directly into relationship
  • tangibles - eg. money, possessions
  • intangibles - eg. energy, emotion, self-disclosures
  2. extrinsic investments: resources which didn’t feature in relationship, but now closely associated with it
  • tangibles - eg. possessions bought together, mutual friends, children
  • intangibles - eg. shared memories

Question 7

describe commitment in a relationship

Answer 7

high satisfaction (few costs/more rewards), less attractive alternatives & sizes of investments are increasing

Question 8

satisfaction vs. committment

Answer 8

• rusbult et al. (2011) argued committment is main psychological factor causing people to stay in relationships & satisfaction contributes
• dissatisfied partners may choose to stay as committed
• committed as made investment they don’t want to lose = work to maintain/salvage damaged relationship

Question 9

behavioural relationship maintenance mechanisms

Answer 9

‣ enduring partners promote relationship (accommodation)
‣ put partners interests first (willingness to sacrifice)
‣ forgive them for serious transgressions (forgiveness)

Question 10

cognitive relationship maintenance mechanisms

Answer 10

• committed partners think about each other & potential alternatives in specific/predictable ways
• unrealistically positive about partner (positive illusions)
• negative about alternatives/other peoples relationships (ridiculing alternatives)

Question 11

AO3 +) research support
-) counterpoint to research support

Answer 11

E:
- le & agnew (2003) conducted meta-analysis of 52 studies from late 1970s to 1999
- ~11,000 participants from 5 countries
- found satisfaction, comparison level for alternatives & investment side all predicted relationship committment
- relationships where committment was greatest were most stable & lasted longest
- outcomes true for men/women (across all cultures in analysis) & homosexual couples

T: suggests validity to rusbults claim that these factors are universally important features in romantic relationships

HOWEVER: strong correlations been found between all important factors predicted by model
- most of studies in le & agnew (2003) meta-analysis were correlational
- don’t allow us to conclude these factors identified by model cause committment
- possibly the more committed you feel towards partner, the more investment you’re willing to make, so direction of causality may be reverse of that suggested by model
= isn’t clear that model has identified causes of commitment rather than factors associated with it