theories of romantic relationships: rusbult’s investment model Flashcards
what is the investment model a development of?
the social exchange theory
what two factors are similar to SET?
satisfaction and comparison with alternatives
what are the three factors in the model?
factor 1: satisfaction
factor 2: comparison with alternatives
factor 3: investment
what is satisfaction?
the extent to which romantic partners feel the rewards of a relationship exceed the costs
what is comparison with alternatives?
a judgement that partners make concerning whether a relationship with a different partner would bring more rewards and fewer costs
what is investment?
the resources associated with a romantic relationship which partners would lose if their relationship were to end
what are the two major types of investment?
•intrinsic investments
•extrinsic investments
what are intrinsic investments?
•any resources we put directly into the relationship
•they might be tangible things like money or possessions, or intangible ones like energy, emotion and self disclosures
what are extrinsic investments?
•resources that previously did not feature in the relationship, but are not closely associated with it
•tangibles include possessions bought together (eg a car), mutual friends and children
•intangible examples include shared memories
what do the three factors all contribute to?
commitment level
what does rusbult argue is the main psychological factor that causes people to stay in relationships?
commitment , with satisfaction being a contributing factor
why are people so committed to their partners?
because they have made an investment that they do not want to see go to waste
what does commitment express itself in?
everyday relationship maintenance behaviours
what are relationship maintenance mechanisms?
•accommodation
•willingness to sacrifice
•forgiveness
•positive illusions
•ridiculing alternatives
strength: research support
•meta analysis by Le and Agnew
•reviewed 52 studies including 11,000 participants
•they found that satisfaction, comparison with alternatives and investment size all predicted relationship committment
•relationship in which commitment was greatest lasted the longest
•the outcomes were true for all genders/ cultures/ relationships
•this suggests that there is validity to Rusbult’s claim that these factors are universally important features of romantic relationships
limitation: correlational research
•strong correlations have been found between all the important factors in the investment model
•most of the studies in Le and Agnew’s meta analysis were correlational
•this does not allow us to conclude that the factors identified by the model cause committment in a relationship
•it could be that the more committed you are the more investment you make
•therefore it is not clear that the model has identified with the causes of committment rather than the factors associated with it
strength: explains abusive relationships
•the model is an explanation of relationships that involve intimate partner violence
•Rusbult and Martz studied domestically abused women and found that those who were most likely to return to an abusive partner reported having made the greatest investments and having the fewest attractive alternatives
•these women were dissatisfied with their relationship but still committed to them
•therefore the model shows that satisfaction on its own cannot explain why people stay in relationships- commitment and investment are also factors
limitation: oversimplifies investment
•Goodfriend and Agnew pointed out that there is more to investment than just the resources that you have already put into a relationship
•in the early stages partners usually make very few actual investments
•they extended Rusbult’s investment model by including the investment partners make in their future plans
•they are motivated to commit to eachother because they want to see their cherished plans for the future work out
•this means the original model is limited because it fails to recognise the true complexity of investment, especially how planning for the future influences commitment
limitation: perception vs reality
•the model is supported by self report methods (questionnaires) which can be influenced by biases and subjective beliefs of respondents
•however these may be appropriate methods to measure investment and comparison with alternatives because what determines commitment to a relationship is not the objective reality
•what matters more is the partners perception or belief (one partner may think they’ve made a big investment even though that isn’t the case)
