theories of RR - equity theory Flashcards
outline equity theory.
another economic theory developed in response to a significant criticism of SET. it acknowledges the impact of rewards and costs on relationship satisfaction, but criticises SET for ignoring the role of equity - the perception that partners have that the distribution of rewards and costs is fair.
outline the role of equity in relationships.
equity = fairness.
what matters is that both partners level of profit is roughly the same - not levels of rewards and costs.
when there is a lack of equity, one partner overbenefits and the other underbenefits - leads to dissatisfaction.
both over and underbenefitted are examples of inequity, however it is the underbenefitted partner that is most likely to feel the most dissatisfaction - anger, hostility etc.
overbenefitted partner - guilt, shame etc.
therefore satisfaction is about perceived fairness.
outline the consequences of inequity.
a partner subject to inequity will become distressed and dissatisfied in the relationship if it goes on for long enough.
greater the perceived inequality - greater the dissatisfaction. equity theory predicts a strong correlation between the two. applies to both underbenefitted and overbenefitted partners.
most dissatisfaction comes from a change in the level of equity as time goes on. e.g. start of relationship it may feel fine to give more than you receive. but if it develops that way for a long time it will lead to dissatisfaction.
how to partners deal with inequity?
the ‘put-upon’ will work hard to make the relationship equitable if they believe it is possible.
more unfair the relationship feels - harder they will work to restore equity.
could also be cognitive rather than behavioural.
they will revise their perceptions of rewards and costs so that the relationship feels more equitable, even if nothing actually changes.
what once was a cost = now accepted as the norm (e.g. untidiness, abuse)
discuss research support as a strength of equity theory.
(Stafford and canary, 2006)
(Utne, 1984)
A strength of equity theory is evidence from research support of the role of equity in maintaining relationships.
Stafford & Canary (2006) studied over 200 married couples who completed questionnaires on relationship equity and satisfaction. In addition, participants were asked questions about the ways they maintained their relationships, such as by dividing chores.
They found that partners who perceived their relationships as fair and balanced, followed by spouses who over-benefitted from the relationships, experienced the most satisfaction. Those who under-benefitted showed lowest levels of satisfaction - thus supporting equity theory.
SIMILARLY -
Utne et al. (1984) used self-report scales to measure equity and satisfaction in recently married couples. The 118 participants were aged between 16 and 45 and had been together for 2 years or more before marrying.
The study found that partners who rated their relationships as more equitable were also more satisfied with them. This suggests that fairness is important to maintaining satisfaction in relationships - thus also supporting equity theory.
HOWEVER -
both these studies used self-report techniques which risk problems such as social desirability bias confounding the results, as participants may not wish to admit that their relationship is inequitable or unsatisfying for fear of judgement from others.
This could potentially weaken the internal validity of the findings, thereby weakening the support these studies can lend equity theory itself.
discuss individual differences as a limitation of equity theory.
a limitation of equity theory is that not all partners in RRs are concerned with achieving equity.
There are individual differences in how different types of people approach relationships - there are people who are less sensitive to inequity and are prepared to give more in
the relationships (benevolents).
Other people (entitleds), believe they deserve to over-benefit from relationships and don’t feel too guilty about this.
This means that it is unlikely that equity theory is able to explain all relationships, and is not a universal law of social interaction.
discuss culture bias and gender bias as a limitation of equity theory.
A limitation of equity theory is that it is not generalisable to all cultures.
researchers have shown that the concept of equity is more important in Western cultures than non-Western cultures.
They found that both men and women from non-Western (collectivist) cultures claimed to be most satisfied with their relationships when they were over-benefitting from it, not when the relationships were fair.
This suggests that to apply equity theory to relationships in collectivist cultures would be an example of imposed etic, meaning that equity is limited to explaining maintenance of relationships in Western cultures - limiting its value.
SIMILARLY -
there are further individual differences in the ability of equity theory to explain relationship maintenance – it cannot be applied equally to both genders.
Kahn et al (1980) found that men are more likely to focus on the norm of equity in relationships. Women are more likely to focus on the norm of equality – should get the same benefits no matter how much they put into relationships.
This suggests that men and women may not feel the same way about equity in relationships and we cannot be confident that we can apply the theory to both genders in the same way, so to do so would mean that equity theory would be beta biased - limiting the value of equity theory.
compare equity theory with other theories.
(SET)
(investment model)
Overall, equity theory is an improvement on social exchange theory as it doesn’t make the mistake of suggesting that each partner is looking purely to profit out of their relationship at the expense of their other half.
BUT equally, it does not consider investments in relationships in as much depth as investment theory, and so is limited in that respect.
For example, equity theory fails to explain why people stay in abusive relationships, whereas investment theory can account for this.
In addition, it doesn’t fully explain why people in long term relationships with more commitments may find it harder to leave that people in short term relationships.
this suggests that ET is a limited explanation of romantic relationships and investment theory may be a more valid explanation of some relationships.
